Tesla’s High-Stakes Trademark War Over ‘Cybercab’: Battling a Serial Squatter Just as Production Revs Up

Key Takeaways

• Tesla files a 167-page, 5-count opposition at USPTO against UNIBEV for squatting on ‘Cybercab’ trademark covering vehicles.
• First count accuses UNIBEV of fraud by falsely claiming no prior use of “Cybercab,” despite Tesla’s October 2024 unveil.
• Second count highlights bad faith: UNIBEV is a French beverage wholesaler with no vehicle experience; principal Jean-Louis Lentali follows Elon Musk family on social media.
• UNIBEV’s pattern of squatting includes prior filings for Teslaquila, Cyberquad, and Cybertaxi, with French priority date before Tesla’s US filing.
• Remaining counts argue confusion/dilution with Tesla’s CYBERTRUCK marks and false connection suggestion.
• Critical timing: Tesla rolled first Cybercab off line Feb 17, 2026, targets volume production April, but lacks legal name ownership due to delayed filing.
• Top comment by Ed Holthause sarcastically claims Lentali grabbed name for drone-delivered Cabernets in France.
• Electrek’s take: Strong case but self-inflicted; likely settlement where Tesla pays UNIBEV, as opposition process takes months.

In the fast lane of electric vehicle innovation, Tesla is hitting a legal speed bump. On February 18, 2026, the company fired off a massive 167-page opposition filing at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) against French beverage wholesaler UNIBEV’s claim to the “Cybercab” trademark. This isn’t just any dispute—it’s a classic case of alleged trademark squatting, complete with accusations of fraud, bad faith, and a pattern of predatory filings targeting Tesla’s branding. With Tesla’s first Cybercab rolling off the Gigafactory Texas line on February 17, 2026, and volume production slated for April, the timing couldn’t be more critical. ❶ ❷

As a blogger who’s followed Tesla’s rollercoaster journey from scrappy startup to EV titan, this saga underscores a harsh reality: even visionaries like Elon Musk can trip over basic intellectual property (IP) housekeeping. Let’s dive deep into the facts, the drama, and what it means for Tesla’s robotaxi revolution.

The Timeline: How a French Seltzer Company Snagged Priority

Tesla unveiled the Cybercab—a sleek, steering-wheel-less autonomous vehicle—at its “We, Robot” event on October 10, 2024. Elon Musk hyped it on stage, but crucially, Tesla hadn’t filed for the trademark yet. Enter UNIBEV: the company filed for “Cybercab” in France on April 29, 2024 (months before Tesla’s reveal), claiming international priority, and followed up with the USPTO on October 28, 2024—just two weeks after the unveil but before Tesla’s November 2024 application. ❶ ❸

By November 14, 2025, the USPTO suspended Tesla’s application (Serial No. 98806788) due to UNIBEV’s prior claim (Serial No. 79/412,082), citing potential confusion. Tesla bought time with a 30-day extension granted on February 11, 2026, pushing the opposition deadline to March 14. They didn’t hesitate, dropping the opposition the very next day. ❷

Key Dates at a Glance:

1. April 29, 2024: UNIBEV files in France.
2. October 10, 2024: Tesla unveils Cybercab publicly.
3. October 28, 2024: UNIBEV files at USPTO.
4. November 2024: Tesla finally files.
5. February 17, 2026: First Cybercab produced.
6. February 18, 2026: Tesla’s opposition filed.

This delay? Pure self-inflicted, as Electrek bluntly notes—announce first, protect later is a recipe for chaos. ❸

Breaking Down Tesla’s 5-Count Opposition: A Legal Masterstroke?

Tesla’s filing isn’t holding back. It targets UNIBEV’s application for Classes 12 (vehicles, cars, air vehicles) and 39 (transport services), laying out five powerhouse claims:

• Count 1: Fraud on the USPTO – UNIBEV allegedly lied by claiming no prior use of “cyber,” “cab,” or “cyber cab” on similar goods. Tesla points to its global media blitz post-unveil as ironclad prior use evidence. ❶
• Count 2: Lack of Bona Fide Intent – Bad faith central. UNIBEV is a beverage wholesaler with zero vehicle creds. Principal Jean-Louis Lentali? He’s a Musk superfan, following Elon, Kimbal, Maye, and SpaceX on social media—no vehicle empire in sight. ❶
• Count 3: Likelihood of Confusion – “Cybercab” too close to Tesla’s CYBERTRUCK marks. USPTO has rejected similar like CYBERCAMPER and CYBERVAN. ❶
• Count 4: Dilution of Famous Marks – CYBERTRUCK is iconic; “Cybercab” blurs it.
• Count 5: False Suggestion of Connection – Consumers would assume UNIBEV’s ride is Tesla-affiliated.

This is “as clean as trademark squatting cases get,” per Electrek. Tesla’s evidence paints UNIBEV as a serial opportunist. ❶

Meet the Squatter: UNIBEV and Jean-Louis Lentali’s Tesla Obsession

UNIBEV isn’t your corner liquor store—it’s a French wholesaler peddling seltzers and booze. Lentali, its key figure, has no auto background but a clear Tesla fixation: social follows, and a rap sheet of filings mirroring Tesla teases. ❶

Pattern of Predatory Filings:

• Teslaquila (2020): Tesla’s April Fools’ tequila tease prompted UNIBEV to snag three U.S. trademarks. Tesla rebranded to “Tesla Tequila” and launched anyway, but lost the original name. ❷ ❸
• Cyberquad, Cybertaxi: Filed preemptively, blocking Tesla.
• Cybercab: The latest hit.

Is this squatting or savvy? Critics call it a “vendetta,” but legally, first-to-file wins priority. Negotiations were reportedly underway pre-opposition—no deal yet. ❷

Production vs. Legal Limbo: Cybercab’s Race Against the Clock

Tesla’s not pausing for lawyers. The first unit emerged February 17, 2026, at Giga Texas. Elon reaffirmed: volume production April 2026, sub-$30K consumer deliveries before 2027, scaling to one every 10 seconds. ❶

But without the TM, marketing risks infringement suits. Tesla’s backups? Panic-filed “Cybercar” and “Cybervehicle” post-Q4 2025 earnings—37 seconds apart. Weak sauce: too similar, generic, or clunky. ❷

Production Milestones:

• Now: Prototypes testing in Austin.
• April 2026: Volume ramp (slow start).
• 2026-2027: First customer rides.

Predictions, Lessons, and Advice: Will Tesla Pay to Play?

Likely Outcome: Settlement. TTAB oppositions drag months (or years); Tesla needs the name now. Electrek predicts Tesla pays UNIBEV to abandon—leverage gained, but at a cost. Fraud claims are bold but provable; bad faith is slam-dunk with the beverage angle. ❶

My Take: Tesla’s IP sloppiness is baffling. Musk’s stage announcements outpace legal teams—Robotaxi TM was rejected as generic in 2025. This could’ve been avoided with pre-unveil filings.

Advice for Innovators (Tesla Included):

1. File Early: Intent-to-use apps before hype.
2. Monitor Squatters: Tools like USPTO TESS; watch international (Madrid Protocol).
3. Build War Chests: Budget for settlements—cheaper than rebrands.
4. Diversify Names: Have backups ready, not panic-filed.
5. Leverage Fame: Argue dilution aggressively, as Tesla does.

Top comment gold: Ed Holthause jokes Lentali wants “drone-delivered Cabernets.” Hilarious, but underscores the absurdity—a seltzer guy vs. EV king.

In conclusion, Tesla’s opposition is a strong counterpunch, but victory might just buy time for a check to clear. Cybercab’s future rides on resolution before April ramps. Stay tuned—this robotaxi race just got litigious.