Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce are dealing with a lawsuit tied to the name of their Kansas City restaurant, 1587 Prime.
A sneaker brand has filed a trademark infringement claim against the Chiefs teammates and their restaurant partners, asserting that the use of “1587” conflicts with its own branding.
Advertisement
At the center of the dispute is the shared number combination used by both businesses. The legal battle now hinges on whether the two brands can operate under similar marks in different industries.
Photo by David Eulitt/Getty Images
Sneaker brand alleges confusion over “1587” name
The complaint was brought by 1587 Sneakers, which says it began selling footwear under that name on April 13, 2023.
The restaurant’s title merges Mahomes’ No. 15 and Kelce’s No. 87, a pairing the sneaker company argues it had already established in commerce.
Court records show that 1587 Prime applied for its trademark in December 2023 in the restaurant category, while 1587 Sneakers filed its application last October in the clothing category.
Advertisement
The sneaker brand claims that “scores of consumers” have reached out believing the two ventures are connected.
The lawsuit seeks to bar the restaurant group from continuing to use the 1587 branding, halt the sale of related merchandise, and secure unspecified damages.
Trademark attorney questions strength of case
Josh Gerben, a trademark attorney not involved in the matter, indicated the sneaker company could face challenges proving infringement.
He noted that trademarks are often allowed to coexist across separate business sectors unless consumer confusion is clearly shown.
“I think it’s a tough case for the sneaker company,” Gerben said. “Trademarks can coexist in different industries. … Given that the marks are essentially identical here, is a restaurant and a shoe company too close? Are consumers likely to be confused in thinking they are affiliated with one another?”
Advertisement
A publicist for Kelce declined to comment, and a representative for Mahomes did not respond to inquiries. The outcome will determine whether the restaurant can continue operating under its current name.
Read more:
