Tesla Robotaxi Trademark Issues | June Launch Concerns

Tesla’s “Robotaxi” Trademark Application Denied

The United States Patent and Trademark Office has rejected Tesla’s bid to trademark the term “Robotaxi” concerning its vehicles. This decision stems from the office’s assessment that the term is overly generic, as detailed in a recent filing.

Currently, a separate application submitted by Tesla to secure the “Robotaxi” trademark for its forthcoming ride-hailing service remains under review by the USPTO.

Challenges with “Cybercab” Trademark

Furthermore, Tesla’s applications to trademark “Cybercab” have been paused. This is due to other entities actively pursuing trademarks incorporating the “Cyber” prefix.

One such company is seeking numerous trademarks related to aftermarket accessories for the Cybertruck.

Details of the “Robotaxi” Rejection

On Tuesday, the USPTO issued a “nonfinal office action” regarding the “Robotaxi” trademark application. This provides Tesla with a three-month window to respond, or the application will be abandoned.

A legal representative for Tesla has not yet issued a comment in response to a request for clarification.

Timeline of Trademark Filings

Tesla initially filed the trademark applications in October 2024, coinciding with the unveiling of the Cybercab.

The Cybercab is the purpose-built electric vehicle intended for use in Tesla’s planned autonomous ride-hailing network.

Two additional, similar trademark applications for the term “Robobus” were submitted on October 10 and are currently being examined.

USPTO Examiner’s Reasoning

The rejected trademark was assigned to a USPTO examiner on April 14. Tesla stated its intention to utilize the term in relation to “[l]and vehicles; electric vehicles, namely automobiles; automobiles; and structural parts therefor.”

Despite the absence of directly conflicting trademarks, the examiner deemed the application unacceptable as “merely descriptive.”

The examiner noted that “Robotaxi” is already employed by other companies to describe comparable goods and services.

Generic Term Assessment

The examiner’s assessment concluded that “[s]uch wording appears to be generic in the context of applicant’s goods and/or services.”

Required Evidence from Tesla

Tesla is permitted to present evidence and arguments to bolster its case for the trademark. The USPTO has requested specific documentation, including “[f]act sheets, instruction manuals, brochures, advertisements and pertinent screenshots of applicant’s website as it relates to the goods and/or services in the application, including any materials using the terms in the applied-for mark.”

Essentially, Tesla must demonstrate a clear plan outlining how and why it merits exclusive rights to the “Robotaxi” trademark.

Competitor Usage Inquiry

The examiner also requested information from Tesla regarding whether “competitors” utilize terms like “ROBO, ROBOT, or ROBOTIC” in their advertising of similar products or services.

Second “Robotaxi” Application Details

Tesla’s second “Robotaxi” trademark application pertains to the provision of transportation services, encompassing “coordinating travel arrangements for individuals and for groups,” “arranging time-based ridesharing services,” and offering vehicle sharing or rental options.

This application was also assigned to a USPTO examiner on April 14, but a decision is still pending.

Update on “Cybercab” Applications

This report has been updated to include details concerning the “Cybercab” trademark applications.