Practicing before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) isn’t just about knowing the law—it’s about mastering the procedures, expectations, and practical nuances that come from experience. While the rules governing TTAB proceedings are detailed and publicly available, real success often hinges on understanding the unwritten insights shared by those who serve on the front lines: the Board’s judges, Interlocutory Attorneys, and support staff.
In this article, we draw from internal TTAB tips and advanced practice guidance offered by Board insiders to highlight what they wish every practitioner knew before filing an opposition, responding to an Office Action, or arguing an appeal. These perspectives can save parties time, reduce unnecessary disputes, and improve the odds of a favorable outcome.
Know Who Does What at the TTAB
One of the most overlooked aspects of Board practice is understanding how different TTAB personnel contribute to your case. Administrative Trademark Judges decide both ex parte appeals and inter partes cases, usually in three-judge panels. But before your matter reaches the judges, it’s often managed extensively by Interlocutory Attorneys and paralegal staff.
Paralegals issue routine orders, process suspensions, and manage settlement-related filings. Interlocutory Attorneys handle contested motions, conduct discovery conferences, and manage procedural issues throughout inter partes proceedings. Knowing this division of labor helps parties direct their questions and filings more effectively—and avoid wasting time by contacting the wrong individuals or departments.
ESTTA and TTABVUE: Not Just Portals, But Case Lifelines
Many practitioners treat ESTTA and TTABVUE as mere filing and viewing tools, but for those at the Board, these systems are crucial lifelines for case management and transparency. The TTAB Tips stress that ESTTA should be used for nearly all filings, and parties are strongly encouraged to avoid paper submissions unless absolutely necessary.
TTABVUE provides a full docket history of each case, including public filings and Board orders. What’s important to understand is that when problems occur—such as a missing document or filing error—TTAB staff will often refer back to the ESTTA tracking number or TTABVUE record to diagnose and correct issues. If you don’t retain and reference your ESTTA confirmation emails or neglect to review TTABVUE before contacting the Board, you risk both confusion and delay.
Don’t Rely on Informal Communication
Another practice TTAB judges and attorneys caution against is the temptation to communicate informally with the Board. Ex parte contact about the merits of a case is strictly prohibited, and even inquiries about case status should go through the proper channels. The TTAB information line is available for general questions, but specific legal or procedural issues must be addressed through formal filings or motions.
Emails to the Board’s ESTTA technical team are for troubleshooting system errors, not for submitting arguments, briefs, or evidence. In short, if you have something to say to the Board about your case, make sure it’s in writing, filed via ESTTA, and properly served.
The Record Is Sacred—Respect It
One of the most common sources of frustration for TTAB decision-makers is improper submission of evidence. Attaching exhibits to briefs, failing to cite to the official record, or trying to introduce new material in reply briefs are all procedural errors that can damage your credibility and undermine your case.
The Board expects parties to complete the evidentiary record before filing an appeal or moving into trial. If additional evidence becomes relevant, the correct procedure is to file a motion to reopen or a request for remand—not to sneak in documents later and hope for leniency.
Understanding the evidentiary rules in the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) is essential. For instance, simply citing a third-party registration number without providing a proper TSDR printout will not make that registration of record. Internet evidence must include both the URL and the date it was accessed. These rules may seem technical, but they’re fundamental to the integrity of the TTAB’s adjudicative process.
Discovery Is Not a Weapon
The TTAB’s discovery process is more limited than in federal court and is designed to streamline rather than escalate proceedings. Judges and Interlocutory Attorneys routinely see discovery abuse in the form of overly broad interrogatories, boilerplate objections, and attempts to use discovery to wear down the opposing party.
The Board urges attorneys to make good-faith efforts to resolve discovery disputes before bringing them to its attention. Filing a motion to compel without first engaging in meaningful communication is often a strategic misstep—and one that may prompt the Board to deny relief outright.
Discovery should be proportional to the needs of the case. This means avoiding unnecessary fishing expeditions and focusing instead on the core facts relevant to standing, priority, use, or likelihood of confusion. If parties spent more time reviewing TBMP Section 414, which lists commonly discoverable categories of information, many disputes could be resolved without intervention.
ACR Is Underused—And Often Misunderstood
Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR) remains one of the TTAB’s most underutilized tools. Despite its potential to shorten proceedings and reduce costs, many parties are either unaware of ACR or hesitant to use it. Board attorneys stress that ACR isn’t a rigid procedure; it’s a flexible agreement between the parties to streamline the presentation of evidence and allow the Board to resolve factual disputes on a paper record.
Early in a proceeding—ideally during the discovery conference—is the best time to explore ACR. Even if the parties don’t agree on a full ACR approach, they can still stipulate to facts, narrow the scope of discovery, or agree to rely on summary judgment filings as trial evidence. These procedural agreements can dramatically simplify litigation and are viewed favorably by the Board.
Default Shouldn’t Be a Surprise
TTAB staff are often surprised by how many defendants miss deadlines to file answers and then scramble to cure default. While the Board is generally forgiving of late filings—especially if they’re only a few days late—practitioners should not take this leniency for granted.
If you know a deadline is coming and need more time, the proper course of action is to file a motion to extend with a clear explanation. Waiting until a notice of default has been issued only makes matters worse. A well-prepared practitioner should never be caught off guard by a missed deadline.
Final Thoughts
Practicing before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board demands not only technical compliance with the rules but also a deeper understanding of how the Board operates behind the scenes. From respecting the evidentiary record to mastering electronic systems like ESTTA and TTABVUE, success at the TTAB often comes down to professionalism, preparation, and procedural discipline.
The TTAB Tips offered by judges and staff aren’t just suggestions—they’re windows into the expectations of the very people who will decide your case. By heeding their guidance and treating each proceeding with strategic focus and procedural care, you not only advocate more effectively for your client but also strengthen the integrity of the trademark system as a whole.