WWE: Titus O’Neil & Robert Roode Moved To Alumni Section Of WWE Roster, WWE Files New Trademark & Abandons Lola Vice Trademark, ESPN & BAMTech Added As Defendants In Class Action Lawsuit Against WWE Over Misleading Claims About PLE Access on ESPN Unlimited

Titus O’Neil & Robert Roode Moved To Alumni Section Of WWE Roster

WWE recently updated the roster page on their official website. These new changes included Titus O’Neil and Robert Roode being moved from the active roster to the alumni section.

Titus O'Neil has been moved to the WWE Alumni section. pic.twitter.com/jI1Sf0nZQ3

— Fightful Wrestling (@Fightful) September 22, 2026

It is currently not known if this is an indication of an actual change in O’Neil and Roode’s current status with the company in regards to potential departures.

O’Neil has been working as a WWE Global Ambassador while Roode has been working as a backstage producer in WWE.

O’Neil last wrestled in WWE in 2020 while Roode last wrestled in WWE in 2022.

---

WWE Files New Trademark & Abandons Lola Vice Trademark

WWE filed a new trademark for “SmackDown” on September 18 for merchandise-related purposes to the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

Portion of trademark filing:

IC 006: Trophies made primarily of common metal for use as awards, namely, championship trophy belts.

WWE also recently abandoned a trademark for “Vice City” based on recent trademark records. This trademark was initially filed on August 4 and was associated with Lola Vice ahead of her main roster debut.

In the filing, it was stated that “The owner of the trademark application withdrew (e.g. abandoned) the application and the application is no longer active.“

The reason for the trademark abandonment is currently not known but it has been speculated online since the trademark was first made public that WWE could run into issues due to “Vice City” being associated with the Grand Theft Auto video game series by Rockstar.

---

Class Action Lawsuit Against WWE Over Misleading Claims About PLE Access on ESPN Unlimited Update –
ESPN & BAMTech Officially Added As Defendants In Lawsuit

As noted before, a class action lawsuit was filed this past January against WWE and ESPN alleging that both companies had committed deceptive marketing practices regarding WWE moving their Premium Live Events (PLEs) to ESPN’s new ESPN Unlimited streaming service. These claims revolved around marketing from both WWE and ESPN telling all existing ESPN subscribers that they would have access to WWE PLEs for free when that was not the case for those with certain cable or streaming providers. WWE filed a motion this past April seeking to force the lawsuit into private arbitration.

PWInsider’s Mike Johnson reported that the U.S. District Court in Connecticut issued a ruling on September 18 officially adding both ESPN and BAMTech, LLC (ESPN subsidiary that handles their streaming technology) as official defendants in the lawsuit.

Johnson reported that both ESPN and BAMTech have claimed that the lawsuit should be moved to private arbitration based on the plantiffs’ subscribing to the ESPN Unlimited service and they would be falling under those terms of service for any disputes.

Portion of court ruling:

Having carefully considered the matter, the Court concludes that ESPN is not entitled to intervene as a matter of right. (See discussion infra Section II.B.) Intervention under Rule 24(a) requires, among other things, a showing that the proposed intervenor’s interest in the litigation will not be sufficiently protected by the existing defendant, and ESPN has not made that showing with the “rigor[]” required by the Second Circuit’s Rule 24(a) case law. (See infra Section II.B.) But its arguments for permissive intervention under Rule 24(b) are compelling. (See discussion infra Section II.C.) The motions will therefore be granted. (See infra Section III.)”

The plantiffs are currently seeking “An award of actual, compensatory, and/or consequential damages, alternatively, an award of nominal damages (if and as necessary), an award of statutory damages (if and as permitted by law), an award of punitive damages (pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §42-110g(a) and/or as otherwise permitted by law, an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses incurred in connection with this action (pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §42-110g(d) and/or as otherwise permitted by law, an award of the costs of this action (pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §42-110g(d) and/or as otherwise permitted by law), any injunctive relief necessary to preclude WWE from (a) continuing to violate CUTPA, (b) conspiring with ESPN to violate CUTPA, and/or (c) aiding and/or abetting ESPN in its violation(s) of CUTPA; and/or any other legal or equitable relief as the Court deems appropriate.”