The Athletics’ Unusual Las Vegas Trademark Situation

Professional sports teams have a long history of deficiencies in their trademark filings and registrations. This was on full display when the Utah NHL franchise’s early flirtation with the name “Utah Yetis,” which created immediate conflicts with the well-established YETI outdoor goods company. While Cleveland rebranded from the Indians to Guardians, they ran into a trademark dispute. A men’s roller derby team in Cleveland had been using the name “Cleveland Guardians” and selling branded merchandise for years. When Major League Baseball’s franchise announced the same new name, the roller derby team sued, alleging trademark infringement and consumer confusion. No one realized there was a team with the same name during their trademark search. This research mistake led to the baseball team having to pay the roller derby team an “amicable” amount in their resolution. These disputes show how even billion-dollar organizations can face operational and financial complications when they fail to conduct proper trademark due diligence.

Now, as the Oakland Athletics prepare to relocate to Las Vegas in 2028, they recently filed two trademark applications for the names LAS VEGAS ATHLETICS and VEGAS ATHLETICS but were denied by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for the second time. The refusal is non-final, meaning the Athletics will have the opportunity to respond for the third time. The USPTO viewed the proposed names as primarily geographically descriptive and lacking distinctiveness.

Geographic descriptiveness refers to a name that primarily tells consumers where goods or services come from, rather than identifying who provides them. A “geographic indicator” refers to a word or phrase that primarily tells consumers where goods or services originate, rather than identifying the specific source providing them. Business names such as “New York Pizza,” “Miami Fitness,” or “Texas BBQ” immediately communicate location. They inform the public about geographic origin, but they do not, on their own, clearly distinguish one business from another. Allowing one business to own that word would unfairly block others from describing where they are or what they do. That is why a brand name has the strongest chance of obtaining federal trademark protection when it is distinctive and unique, because it sets itself apart from other brands.

The USPTO stated in the Office Action that the most important part of “Las Vegas Athletics” is “Las Vegas,” which is a famous location that people immediately recognize. The word “Athletics” is commonly used in sports and does not really make the name unique. The USPTO concluded the name simply describes a baseball team from Las Vegas, rather than pointing to one specific brand.

The USPTO also noted that ATHLETICS refers to “activities such as sports, exercises, and games that require physical skill and stamina.” The term is commonly used in the sports world and, as a result, does little to make the overall mark unique or distinctive. This common usage weakens its ability to distinguish the team’s brand from other sports-related organizations.

A defense to an Office Action for lack of distinctiveness is that the mark has acquired distinctiveness. Acquired distinctiveness is when a name that started as ordinary or descriptive becomes a protectable trademark because people have come to recognize it over time. The Athletics tried a version of this by pointing to their long history dating back to the Philadelphia Athletics in 1901 and through subsequent stops in Kansas City and Oakland. The USPTO did not agree and stated, “applicant’s claim of ownership of such registration is insufficient evidence of acquired distinctiveness because the mark is highly descriptive of the goods and/or services.” The team's history did not help. Even having the OAKLAND ATHLETICS as a registered trademark does not matter because these are two totally different marks. The team has not played as a Las Vegas franchise yet, so there is not sufficient marketplace evidence that “Las Vegas Athletics” acquired distinctiveness.

The Athletics are not alone in their struggle for distinctiveness. The Las Vegas Raiders, who relocated from Oakland in 2020 and now play their home games at Allegiant Stadium, took nearly ten years to secure a trademark registration for “Las Vegas Raiders.” Trademark records show that at one point their application was suspended because third-party filers beat them to the mark, delaying the process and driving up legal costs. This shows that the Athletics are not the only team in Las Vegas facing trademark challenges tied to their move.

Did the Athletics “mess up,” or do they simply need more time for their Las Vegas identity to marinate? The most accurate view is that this is a problem of timing, not negligence. Typically, the Athletics could have shown real-world evidence, such as strong sales, widespread advertising, media exposure, and public recognition, that is usually needed to overcome a descriptiveness refusal. Now, one of the few ways to show this would be to create a consumer survey that would show how the public strongly connects the name “Las Vegas Athletics” with the Athletics organization and its Major League Baseball team. This would take time and money, which they do have, especially if they extend their deadline to answer the Office Action.

Unfortunately, without a federal trademark registration, it becomes much harder for the team to stop unauthorized merchandise sellers and other third parties from using the name. Without it, the Athletics are left to rely more heavily on limited common-law rights, which are narrower, harder to prove, and often restricted to the specific areas where the team can show actual use. That makes enforcement slower, more expensive, and less predictable, especially in a market like Las Vegas, where tourism, pop-up vendors, and online merchandise create constant opportunities for brand misuse. Receiving a trademark registration sooner rather than later would be more beneficial, but the exact timing is the big question.

Ultimately, until the team fully establishes itself in Las Vegas and consumers come to associate the name with one specific source, the legal foundation for federal protection will remain difficult to prove. Once that public association is established, the Athletics will be positioned to secure federal trademark registration making this a question of timing, not viability.