Judge keeps former OpenAI engineer in custody pending trial

A federal magistrate judge ordered former OpenAI engineer Abdulrahman Alfozan to remain in custody pending trial after an October 19 detention hearing in San Francisco, according to multiple courtroom accounts. The decision keeps him detained while the criminal case proceeds; it does not determine whether the charge against him is true.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse denied the defense request for release, finding a significant risk that Alfozan would not appear in court. Courtroom accounts said Tse questioned whether bond support associated with the Saudi government would meaningfully ensure his return.

The ruling follows the federal charge filed after a hidden recorder was found in an OpenAI conference room. Alfozan is charged by complaint with one count of using or endeavoring to use a device to intercept oral communications. A Justice Department description of the complaint says prosecutors allege that he placed an encrypted audio recorder behind a television in an OpenAI executive conference room around September 28. OpenAI personnel found the device two days later, according to the department. The allegation has not been proven, and Alfozan is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

In a memorandum seeking detention, prosecutors argued that Alfozan’s resources, Saudi ties and planned one-way family itinerary made him a serious flight risk. The filing also said the investigation could lead to additional charges. No additional charge appeared in the official material available at the research cutoff. Authorities have not publicly established a motive, and the complaint does not charge Alfozan with acting as a foreign agent or stealing trade secrets.

Defense lawyer William Pernik called the flight-risk concerns baseless and said there was no evidence that Alfozan was spying for Saudi Arabia. He said the family trip was arranged before the alleged device installation and was tied to paternity leave and family immigration needs. Pernik proposed home detention, GPS monitoring, travel restrictions, passport surrender and a bond backed by assets and supporters.

The sources reviewed did not include a written detention order or an official October 19 court entry. The public record also does not establish what, if anything, the encrypted device captured.