Board cancels Storyteller Overland’s two clothing registrations for lack of use when it applied

Decision Desk · October 6, 2026 decision · Nonprecedential

The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (the Board) is the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office panel that decides challenges to trademark registrations and appeals from refused applications. The Board marked this opinion nonprecedential, meaning it does not bind the Board in later cases.

The Board cancelled both of Storyteller Overland, LLC’s registrations, entries on the trademark register, after finding that the company had not used the marks for the listed clothing when it applied. One registration, No. 6045485, covers the words STORYTELLER OVERLAND, and the other, No. 6053520, covers a logo with those words beneath a mountain range inside an oval. The registrations listed hats, caps, T-shirts and hiking jackets among the goods. Overland Sheepskin Co., Inc. brought the case by filing a petition to cancel, a request that the Board remove existing registrations, against both registrations. Opinion, pp. 2, 55.

Source: the Board’s complete opinion in case 92082396, with page citations below. This report describes the decision; it is not legal advice.

In an earlier summary judgment ruling, a decision made on the written evidence without a trial, the Board ruled for Overland Sheepskin on hiking vests, hiking coats, hiking scarves and hiking socks and said those goods will be deleted from the registrations in due course. The Board found no documented sales of the clothing still at issue by the dates Storyteller applied. Opinion, pp. 3, 36.

For an application, a request to register a mark, based on existing use, the Board said the listed goods must have been sold or transported before filing. The mark must appear on the goods, their packaging, associated displays, tags or labels. Opinion, p. 9.

Overland Sheepskin Co. pointed to the absence of clothing orders, sales invoices and receipts before the filing dates. Storyteller did not contest that it lacked documents showing sales by those dates. Storyteller relied mainly on testimony from founder Jeffrey Hunter to answer the claim. Opinion, p. 11.

Hunter said he suspected clothing sales in 2018 but could not name a buyer. The Board found his account of sales and giveaways before filing vague, speculative and inconsistent. Opinion, pp. 14, 38.

The Board found that Instagram posts advertised clothing but did not show sales or distribution. Photographs of closed shipping boxes did not show what was inside, the Board found. Even assuming the boxes contained clothing, the Board said deliveries to prospective vehicle dealers and two shirts to friends did not establish ordinary clothing sales. Opinion, pp. 20, 37–38.

Hunter testified that Storyteller sold clothing at a May 2019 expo. The Board found no evidence that the expo occurred before the dates Storyteller applied. Opinion, pp. 34, 36.

Storyteller argued that Overland Sheepskin’s delay in challenging the registrations harmed its investment in the brand. The Board rejected that defense, a reason Storyteller offered for keeping its registrations, because Storyteller only named it in its answer, its written response to the petition, and first explained it in its final written argument after the evidence-gathering and trial periods were over. The Board also found that Storyteller failed to prove unreasonable delay or harm caused by the wait. Opinion, pp. 48, 54.

The Board did not decide Overland Sheepskin’s separate claims about possible confusion between the marks or later lack of use. Opinion, p. 1.

This report describes the decision as issued; it does not follow any later appeal.

Sources

• The Board’s complete opinion; GleanMark case record.