Travis Kelce and Patrick Mahomes are facing a new challenge in the trademark lawsuit surrounding their Kansas City steakhouse, 1587 Prime.
The Kansas City Chiefs stars have argued that evidence will show they hold no direct interest in the restaurant and are not authorized to control its operations as they seek dismissal of the claims against them.
1587 Sneakers, the company suing over the 1587 name, disputes that characterization. In a new filing, it points to the players’ extensive promotion of the steakhouse and the restaurant’s own public description of Kelce and Mahomes as co-founders.
The disagreement does not establish that the players legally own or control the restaurant.
1587 Sneakers Says They Are More Than Promotional ‘Pretty Faces’
According to TMZ, Kelce and Mahomes moved to dismiss the case while arguing that evidence will show they have no direct interest in the restaurant and are not authorized to exert control over it. They have also challenged the case on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that they lack sufficient ties to New York, where 1587 Sneakers filed the lawsuit.
The sneaker company rejected the attempt to distance the players from the business. In its latest filing, 1587 Sneakers accused Kelce and Mahomes of trying to recast themselves as “two distant celebrities that are mere promotional ‘pretty faces’ of the alleged infringing enterprise with no New York ties.”
The plaintiff cited their public involvement in promoting 1587 Prime and the fact that the restaurant’s name combines Mahomes’ No. 15 jersey with Kelce’s No. 87. A judge has not ruled that Kelce or Mahomes owns, manages or controls the restaurant.
1587 Prime Publicly Calls Mahomes and Kelce Its Co-Founders
View this post on Instagram
The official 1587 Prime website currently describes the Kansas City restaurant as “co-founded by Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce in partnership with Noble 33.” The site also describes 1587 Prime as a collaboration involving the two NFL stars and the hospitality company.
The Lawsuit Began With a Sneaker Company Using the Same Numbers
1587 Sneakers filed its lawsuit on February 17th in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, naming Kelce, Mahomes, restaurant entities and Noble 33-related defendants. The footwear company says it began using the 1587 name commercially in April 2023 and claims earlier trademark rights based on that use.
The company uses 1587 in reference to the year Filipino sailors arrived in what is now California, an event it describes as the earliest recorded Asian presence in what became the United States. As detailed in PEOPLE’s original report on the lawsuit, 1587 Sneakers alleges that consumers have mistakenly believed the footwear company is associated with the restaurant.
Branded Clothing Creates More Overlap Than the Steaks Alone
1587 Sneakers sells footwear and apparel, while 1587 Prime has also offered merchandise carrying its branding. The sneaker company argues that the apparel creates additional overlap between the businesses and increases the potential for consumer confusion.
1587 Sneakers is seeking damages and legal fees, as well as an injunction that would prevent the defendants from continuing to use the disputed branding. The restaurant side has its own federal trademark rights. A “1587 PRIME” registration covering restaurant and bar services was issued to Noble 33 Holdings in March 2026.
1587 Sneakers, meanwhile, relies in part on its claimed commercial use of 1587 beginning in April 2023, before the Kansas City restaurant opened in September 2025.
The Court Has Not Ruled on the Trademark Claims
The case previously reached the court in March when 1587 Sneakers sought emergency relief. Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald declined to sign the requested temporary restraining order. In her order, she said the complaint had not yet made clear that the New York court had personal jurisdiction over the defendants or that venue was proper.
The judge also pointed to the sneaker company’s delay in seeking emergency relief after learning about the restaurant and noted that the delay weighed against a finding of immediate irreparable harm.