Travis Kelce and Patrick Mahomes are facing pushback over new court claims involving their Kansas City steakhouse, according to court documents cited by the company suing them for trademark infringement. The two NFL stars are defendants in the case, and 1587 Sneakers argues the athletes cannot simply walk away from a business built on their names and jersey numbers.
As reported by TMZ, court filings involving Kelce and Mahomes concern the restaurant and the federal case. 1587 Sneakers has opposed that framing in the case. The steakhouse's own website, however, describes 1587 Prime as a collaboration between Mahomes and Kelce in partnership with hospitality group Noble 33, according to the same report.
A Name Built on Jersey Numbers, Not Just Marketing
The restaurant's name comes directly from the two athletes' combined NFL numbers — Mahomes wears 15, Kelce wears 87 — a detail central to why 1587 Sneakers says the athletes cannot claim distance from the brand. Court records reviewed by TMZ note that Kelce and Mahomes promoted the steakhouse in 2025, well before the lawsuit was filed. That promotional history is part of why 1587 Sneakers argues the pair are required to defend themselves in the trademark dispute rather than hide behind their business entity.
1587 Sneakers filed its federal trademark infringement lawsuit against Kelce, Mahomes, 1587 Prime KC LLC, and Noble 33 on February 17, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to The Fashion Law. The shoe company claims it already held rights to the 1587 name for its footwear line before the steakhouse adopted it for restaurant branding and later expanded into apparel.
Two Very Different Origins for the Same Four Digits
1587 Sneakers was co-founded by Adam King and Sam Hyun to honor 1587 AD, the year Filipino sailors first arrived in Morro Bay, California — marking, according to Positively Filipino, the earliest recorded presence of Asians in what is now the United States. The company's history underpins its claim to common-law trademark rights predating the steakhouse's public launch.
1587 Prime opened on September 17, 2025, coinciding with Mahomes' 30th birthday, as a nearly 10,000-square-foot, two-level steakhouse inside the Loews Kansas City Hotel downtown. Noble 33, the hospitality group behind the venue, has also expanded into other markets; Hoodline previously covered its Miami debut of Sparrow Italia, which noted the group's partnership with Mahomes and Kelce on the Kansas City project.
Filing Dates at the Heart of the Legal Fight
The dispute traces back to a gap in paperwork. 1587 Prime filed its federal trademark application in December 2023 under the restaurant and bar services category, while 1587 Sneakers did not file its own federal application for clothing and footwear until October 30, 2025, per Berenzweig Leonard LLP. Under the Lanham Act, prior commercial use of an unregistered mark can still establish common-law rights capable of challenging a later federal registrant, provided nationwide brand recognition and earlier usage can be proven.
The lawsuit further contends that 1587 Prime stepped directly into the footwear company's retail category by selling branded apparel — including t-shirts and caps bearing the standalone digits 1587 — beyond its core dining services, according to Complex. Court documents submitted by 1587 Sneakers allege that numerous consumers contacted the shoe company after the restaurant opened to ask whether the brand was affiliated with or endorsing Mahomes and Kelce's dining venture.
Where the Case Stands Now
In March, Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald declined a temporary restraining order sought on March 2 that would have blocked advertising, selling, or promoting products using the marks, allowing the restaurant to keep operating. The case also involves questions about whether the New York federal court can exercise jurisdiction over the Kansas City restaurant entities and the two athletes themselves.
1587 Sneakers is suing Kelce and Mahomes for trademark infringement, and the case involves jurisdictional questions in New York.
