If that was the case, that would definitely mean he is not a state actor, which is defined as «An entity that is a part of, or which operates licitly or semi-licitly on behalf or in service of, a government agency.».
The only way you can claim he is a state actor if you think he acts, in his management of X, on behalf of the US state, a claim which would be entirely laughable even to partisans.
If that was the case, that would definitely mean he is not a state actor, which is defined as «An entity that is a part of, or which operates licitly or semi-licitly on behalf or in service of, a government agency.».
The only way you can claim he is a state actor if you think he acts, in his management of X, on behalf of the US state, a claim which would be entirely laughable even to partisans.