Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce’s 1587 lawsuit takes shocking turn as legal expert reveals it isn’t what most fans assume

The legal fight surrounding Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce’s 1587 Prime steakhouse may not come down to a simple question of who owns the “1587” name. A legal expert says the latest stage of the lawsuit is focused on whether the Kansas City Chiefs stars can be held personally responsible for alleged trademark infringement. That distinction could shape the case before a court ever reaches the bigger trademark dispute.The lawsuit was filed by 1587 Sneakers, a shoe and apparel company that says it has used the “1587” name since 2023. The company accuses Mahomes, Kelce and several businesses connected to 1587 Prime of trademark infringement and unfair competition.The name of the Kansas City restaurant combines the players’ famous jersey numbers, with Mahomes represented by 15 and Kelce by 87. That connection has naturally made the athletes central figures in the dispute.But James Molen, an intellectual property attorney and partner at Greenberg Glusker who is not involved in the case, says the immediate legal question is more complicated.“At the current stage of the proceeding, this case isn’t the trademark fight most people assume it is — it’s a fight over how close two celebrity investors have to be to a business before a court can drag them into it personally,” Molen said.Mahomes and Kelce have asked the Southern District of New York to dismiss the case. Their arguments include a challenge to the court’s personal jurisdiction, a claim that New York is not the proper venue and an assertion that the complaint does not show either player personally carried out an infringing act.That could prove important because the athletes argue they sit several corporate layers away from the restaurant’s operating company.“Mahomes and Kelce’s primary argument is that they’re several corporate layers removed from the restaurant’s operating LLC and never personally touched a New York transaction, while the plaintiff says their jersey numbers are the mark, which makes them ‘moving forces’ by definition,” Molen explained.The players also dispute the allegation that they are members of the LLC operating 1587 Prime.The legal battle could take an unexpected turn if the court decides the dismissal motion before examining the competing trademark claims. According to Molen, the three arguments raised by Mahomes and Kelce each offer a possible route out of the case.“While I can’t predict the outcome, here’s what’s worth watching: the athletes’ motion raises three separate grounds for dismissal — no personal jurisdiction, wrong venue, and failure to state a claim — and any one of those, if the court agrees, could result in dismissal,” Molen said.The plaintiff’s response may also become significant. Molen noted that 1587 Sneakers focused mainly on the claim that the complaint itself was legally sufficient, while giving less attention to jurisdiction and venue.“But the plaintiff only really engages with the failure to state a claim, leaving the jurisdiction and venue arguments essentially unanswered,” Molen said. “That’s likely to come up in the athletes’ reply brief, and courts generally don’t look kindly on unaddressed arguments.”The underlying trademark dispute is still alive, though. 1587 Sneakers says it began selling products under the name in April 2023 and applied for its “1587” trademark in October 2025. The company’s application remains under review.Molen also warned against writing off the lawsuit.“I wouldn’t call this case frivolous; a smaller company saying ‘we used this mark first and now we’re getting drowned out’ is the kind of dispute trademark law is built for,” he said.For now, the next major date is September 1, when Mahomes and Kelce are due to file their reply supporting the motion to dismiss. That filing could offer the clearest indication of whether this fight will reach the heart of the 1587 trademark dispute or end on a procedural issue first.