A Jordanian icon reaches America amid competing claims. The public trademark record clarifies one part of the fight and exposes a bigger lesson for Arab restaurant brands.

A shawarma sandwich can travel thousands of miles. A brand has a harder journey. That is the story unfolding around Reem Shawarma, the name many Jordanians associate with Jabal Amman, late nights, and a particular taste of home. In the United States, posts tell different stories about who brought that legacy across the Atlantic. A Fairfax, Virginia, opening presents itself as an extension of the original cafeteria. An Oak Lawn, Illinois, location outside Chicago says it alone is authorized to use the name in America. The sandwich may be familiar. The ownership story is not.

THE LEGACY: An archival image shared by Cafeteria Reem connects the restaurant to 1975. 

Two American arrivals, one Jordanian memory

Posts shared by Cafeteria Reem in Jordan and Shawarma Reem America feature an archival photograph of three uniformed workers and describe a story beginning in 1975. A promotional image places a wrapped shawarma between Amman and the Washington area, with Fairfax marked as the American destination. Other posts advertise Oak Lawn using the imagery of a 1975 Jordanian original.

In an Arabic statement, an account identified as Shawarma Reem says that Samer Ahmad Bani Hamad and partners own the mark in Jordan. It calls Oak Lawn its only authorized U.S. branch and disclaims responsibility for other U.S. locations. That is a claim by an interested party, not a judicial finding. The public record does not resolve whether the operators share a founder, recipe, family history, license, or earlier arrangement.

FAIRFAX: Promotional material links the Virginia opening with Jabal Amman. 

OAK LAWN: A separate post asserts that this is the only authorized U.S. location. Supplied screenshot; assertion unverified.

OAK LAWN: A separate post asserts that this is the only authorized U.S. location. 

What the American trademark records actually show

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office records supply a more precise timeline than the social media debate. In 2016, Samer Ahmad Bani Hamad and Partners Co. applied for a REEM SHAWERMA design mark for restaurant services, claiming priority from a Jordanian filing. It registered in the United States in January 2019 as registration 5652316. But the federal registration was cancelled on July 25, 2025 because the owner did not file an acceptable Section 8 declaration of use. That old registration cannot honestly be described as active today. Cancellation of a registration does not itself decide whether anyone retained separate rights through actual use.

Abdelfattah Holdings LLC filed a different REEM SHAWERMA design application on January 2, 2026, on an intent-to-use basis, then expressly abandoned it on February 7. The earlier version of this article and some online directory listings missed that later event. The application never became a registration.

Levant Food Group LLC filed a red REEM SHAWERMA 1975 design application on February 24, 2026, also on an intent-to-use basis. It remains pending. On September 9, Shawerma Reem USA Holdings LLC obtained an extension through October 10, 2026 to decide whether to oppose that application. An extension is not an opposition filing and proves no party has won.

Shawerma Reem USA Holdings LLC filed its own red design application, with English and Arabic lettering, on March 5, 2026. Unlike Levant’s intent-to-use application, it asserts use in commerce. Its filing lists July 1, 1975, as both first use anywhere and first use in commerce. Those are applicant assertions; the dates and legal significance have not been adjudicated in the materials reviewed here. As of September 27, the USPTO lists that application as assigned to an examining attorney. Neither of the live 2026 applications is a registration.

Trademark 101: a filing receipt is not a deed to a name

Here is the rule that gets lost in these arguments. In the United States, trademark rights can arise when a business actually uses a name or logo to identify the source of goods or services. The first party to make legally significant use can have priority in its market, even if someone else later files an application. A federal registration offers powerful additional benefits, including a presumption of ownership and nationwide protection, but merely pressing submit at the USPTO does not erase an earlier user.

For restaurants, the proof is practical: when and where did a particular business serve customers under the mark? What did the sign, menu, website, receipts, advertising, and ordering pages actually show? Was the use continuous and genuinely connected to U.S. commerce? Evidence and the chain of ownership matter more than a screenshot of an application number.

There is a real nuance. A business may file a good-faith intent-to-use application before opening. If that application matures into a registration after the required use showing, its filing date can create constructive nationwide priority, subject to earlier users, earlier filers, and certain foreign-priority claims. So “use always beats filing” is too simple. The better rule is that priority depends on valid use, filing basis and date, registration, territory, and any predecessor rights or licenses. A 1975 opening in Jordan establishes history; it does not automatically prove U.S. use in 1975. Foreign filings can create specific treaty-based priority when statutory conditions are met, as the original 2016 U.S. application claimed.

A cancelled registration also leaves questions open. It removes that registration from the federal register; it does not automatically transfer the brand to the next applicant. Nor does a pending application certify that its applicant is the authentic heir to a Jordanian restaurant. To settle the Reem conflict, one would need the underlying corporate and licensing agreements, any assignments, U.S. use evidence, the Jordanian records, and the complete prosecution and opposition files. At present, the public filings and competing promotional claims do not support a definitive verdict on who may operate nationally under the name.

The cost of being legendary but fragmented

Reem has what most restaurant founders spend fortunes trying to create: decades of emotional memory, a recognizable product, and a name people carry with them when they emigrate. Opening in Fairfax or greater Chicago should be the moment that history turns into a national platform. Instead, two American audiences may be asked to adjudicate competing origin stories before they have even ordered lunch. Every disputed logo, account, and opening announcement spends attention that could have introduced a new customer to Jordanian shawarma.

This pattern extends beyond one shop. Jordan is full of restaurant names whose reputations cross borders faster than their business systems do. Chili House and Habibah Knafeh illustrate the kind of local recognition that can generate enormous demand abroad; this is not an allegation that either has the same ownership dispute. It is a broader question: how many cherished Arab food institutions define licensing, quality control, shared ownership, and expansion before competing claimants reach the next market?

The problem is rarely culinary talent. It is the failure to agree early on who owns what and how everyone wins when a name grows. A founder may protect a recipe like a family secret while neglecting a maintenance deadline. Relatives may understand their contributions differently. Operators may grant informal permission to use a sign without specifying territory, term, menu standards, or what happens after a falling-out. A store that worked for decades on trust suddenly meets a global market governed by contracts, digital listings, delivery apps, and enforceable rights.

Collaboration is an economic strategy

Being right about history is no substitute for building a durable company. If several people made a name famous, they need a way to recognize those contributions and share in its future. That might mean a holding company with defined equity, a master franchise, territorial licenses, royalties, an independent board, or a settlement that clearly distinguishes related concepts. The right structure depends on facts that outsiders do not yet have. The common requirement is a written agreement that consumers, investors, and operators can understand.

Imagine what cooperation could buy. One consistent brand could negotiate supply contracts, train staff to a common standard, license retail products, invest in shared ordering, and reach far beyond the Jordanian diaspora. A customer in Chicago could recognize the same promise as a customer in Virginia. Each new store would add value to the earlier ones. Under a fractured model, each opening can trigger another argument about authenticity.

The Reem parties can tell their histories and pursue legitimate claims. They can also identify the entity behind each American store, substantiate each authorization claim, and avoid suggesting a relationship that does not exist. If a negotiated structure is possible, explore it. If not, clear, distinct identities would serve customers better than years of confusion.

For every Arab food founder looking west, the lesson is concrete: document the owner and authorized licensees, preserve evidence of actual use, file strategically in each market, meet maintenance deadlines, define territories and quality standards, and put the exit path in writing. A brand is more than a prized recipe or a race to a filing window. It is a promise that must survive its founders.

A NAME WITH HISTORY: A storefront image shared by another Reem account invokes the 1975 heritage.

Arab food is no longer a niche category waiting for permission. Shawarma, knafeh, falafel, and the flavors around them can sit beside the largest global restaurant names. But the next household brand will require more than a treasured recipe and a photograph from 1975. It will require its stewards to settle ownership, invest together, and let the name become bigger than any single branch. Reem’s American controversy is a cautionary tale. It could still become the beginning of a better one.

Records and source note

  • USPTO: 2019 registration, serial 87223006; cancellation dated July 25, 2025
  • USPTO: Abdelfattah application, serial 99575725; express abandonment
  • USPTO: Levant Food Group application, serial 99668327
  • USPTO: Shawerma Reem USA Holdings application, serial 99683859
  • USPTO TTAB: extension of time to oppose, through October 10, 2026
  • USPTO: trademark rights through use
  • USPTO: intent-to-use and constructive priority
Author: Staff Writer | Edited for WTFwire.com