The Oakland Athletics’ journey to the desert just hit a surprising legal speed bump. In late December 2025, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a non-final refusal for the team’s application to trademark the names “Las Vegas Athletics” and “Vegas Athletics.”
While the team is currently playing in California in the city of West Sacramento as they wait for their $2 billion stadium to rise on the Las Vegas Strip, this ruling highlights a fascinating—and frustrating—quirk in intellectual property law.
—
Why Was the Trademark Denied? On the surface, it seems absurd. The “Athletics” have been a professional baseball staple since 1901, moving from Philadelphia to Kansas City to Oakland. However, the USPTO’s refusal boils down to two primary legal concepts:
- Primarily Geographically Descriptive: The trademark office argued that “Las Vegas” is a well-known geographic location and “Athletics” is a generic term for sports. When you put them together, the USPTO sees a phrase that simply describes “sports in Las Vegas” rather than a unique brand.
- Lack of Distinctiveness: The examiner noted that the word “athletics” is defined as “activities such as sports, exercises, and games.”
- Because the term is so broad, granting an exclusive trademark could theoretically prevent local youth leagues or fitness clubs from using the word “athletics” in their own branding.
The “Yetis” Precedent: The A’s aren’t the only professional sports team in this type of trademark situation. The NHL’s Utah team recently faced a similar hurdle when trying to trademark “Yetis,” which was denied due to potential confusion with the brand YETI Coolers which owned a variety of already existing trademark registrations and was well established. Utah eventually pivoted to the “Utah Mammoth.”
The “Sacramento Snag”: Part of the problem is a matter of timing and location. To win a trademark for a descriptive name, a company must prove “acquired distinctiveness” – essentially showing that when the public hears the name, they think of the specific business, not just the general activity.
Because the A’s are currently playing in Sacramento and won’t move to Las Vegas until 2028, they haven’t yet built the “marketplace evidence” (merchandise sales, local advertising, and media coverage) in Nevada to prove that “Las Vegas Athletics” belongs exclusively to them.
What Happens Next? Is this the end of the “Las Vegas Athletics” name? Hardly. This is a common part of the “back-and-forth” in trademark law. Here is how the team will likely respond:
- The Three-Month + Three-Month Extension Window: Major League Baseball (which handles these filings) has until March 29, 2026 to respond to the office action. They may also extend this deadline another three months upon payment of additional fees.
- Proving Secondary Meaning: The team will likely submit evidence of their 125-year history and high-profile stadium plans to argue that the public already associates “Athletics” with their specific MLB franchise.
- The “Las Vegas A’s” Backup: Interestingly, the USPTO did move forward with a notice of publication for “Las Vegas A’s.” This version of the name is seen as more distinctive and is expected to be officially trademarked soon.
- Legal Appeals: If the USPTO holds firm, the A’s can take the case to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board or even federal court.
The Bottom Line: For fans, this doesn’t change the relocation timeline. The stadium is still under construction, and the team is still moving. However, it serves as a reminder that even a century-old brand can’t just “cut and paste” its identity into a new city without a fight from the federal government.