As Major League Baseball (“MLB”) Opening Day arrives, one MLB club has more than baseball on its mind.
On December 29, 2025, the USPTO refused intent-to-use trademark applications for LAS VEGAS ATHLETICS and VEGAS ATHLETICS, on the basis that the trademarks are geographically descriptive. Furthermore, the Athletics baseball team’s claim of acquired distinctiveness based upon ownership of various trademark registrations was rejected by the USPTO. For the unaware, the Athletics baseball team is currently undergoing a multi-year relocation from Oakland, California to Las Vegas, Nevada, and were hoping to obtain a new trademark registration for their new location moving forward. The Athletics now have until March 29, 2026 to submit responses to the USPTO.
For organizations in transition, including relocations or rebrands, these refusals highlight the strategic challenges inherent with intent-to-use trademark filings. While intent-to-use trademark applications are extremely valuable for obtaining a constructive first use date in the USA, there are some real limitations. For instance, whereas the owner of a use-based (or foreign registration based) trademark application would have the option of overcoming a descriptiveness refusal by amending the trademark application to the Supplemental Register, the owner of an intent-to-use trademark application does not have this option.
At our firm, we regularly counsel clients on navigating these issues, including:
- Assessing whether a proposed trademark is descriptive —sometimes starting with a word + distinctive design filing is the smarter path;
- Developing strategies to overcome descriptiveness refusals;
- Evaluating whether acquired distinctiveness can be credibly supported; and
- Positioning brands for protection early in a rollout, relocation, or rebrand.
As teams, companies, and emerging brands evolve, proactive trademark planning remains essential. Please let us know how we can help you successfully navigate these issues.
