Tesla’s attempt to secure exclusive rights to the term “Robotaxi” has encountered significant resistance from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which refused the application on grounds of being “merely descriptive.” USPTO determined that the term has been widely used across the industry to describe autonomous taxi services, effectively classifying it as too generic for a single company to claim ownership.
The rejection, issued through a “nonfinal office action,” gives Tesla a three-month window to respond with supporting evidence or risk abandonment of the application. Meanwhile, a separate Tesla application to trademark “Robotaxi” specifically for its upcoming ride-hailing service remains under examination, potentially leaving a narrow path forward for the electric vehicle manufacturer’s branding strategy.
The Robotaxi setback isn’t Tesla’s only trademark hurdle. Applications for the “Cybercab” trademark—referring to the purpose-built electric vehicle unveiled in October 2024—have stalled due to competing “Cyber” trademark applications from other companies. One competitor has reportedly filed numerous trademark applications related to aftermarket Cybertruck accessories, creating a complex intellectual property landscape for Tesla to navigate.
These trademark challenges emerge at a critical juncture for Tesla, Tesla confirms June launch for Cybercab Robotaxi in Austin, which unveiled the Cybercab alongside its autonomous ride-hailing ambitions last October. The company simultaneously filed trademark applications for “Robobus,” which remain under examination by the USPTO without a determination.
To overcome the USPTO’s objection, Tesla will need to submit substantial evidence demonstrating why it deserves exclusive rights to the “Robotaxi” terminology. Examiner specifically requested fact sheets, instruction manuals, brochures, advertisements, and website screenshots related to the goods and services in the application.
Additionally, Tesla must address whether competitors use terms like “ROBO,” “ROBOT,” or “ROBOTIC” when advertising similar products or services. Requirement underscores the challenge Tesla faces, as autonomous taxi concepts have been discussed using robot-related terminology for over a decade, well before Tesla adopted the term.
The second trademark application, which would cover transportation services including “coordinating travel arrangements,” “arranging time-based ridesharing services,” and vehicle sharing or rentals, was assigned to a USPTO examiner on April 14, though no decision has been filed yet.
For Tesla, securing these trademarks represents more than just branding—it’s about establishing market position in the nascent autonomous ride-hailing sector.
Related Post
Tesla First CyberCab Castings Spotted: Autonomous Taxi Production Underway at Giga Texas
Tesla Cybercab: 300-Mile Range from Sub-50kWh Battery Promises Industry-Leading Efficiency