Practicing before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) demands more than persuasive writing and a compelling argument. The procedural structure of TTAB cases is unforgiving, and nothing exemplifies this better than its strict timing rules. Whether you’re handling an opposition, a cancellation, or an ex parte appeal, missing a deadline—even inadvertently—can be fatal to your case.

What makes these deadlines particularly dangerous is how quietly they operate. The TTAB doesn’t send reminders. There are no courtesy emails flagging your response window. Instead, everything hinges on precise timing based on filings, service rules, and status changes in the case. If you’re not meticulously tracking every interval and interpreting the rules correctly, you could lose your client’s rights without ever getting to the merits.

This is where mastering TTAB timing rules becomes critical. The most skilled litigators not only understand the law—they know how the clock ticks in TTAB practice. And if you’re not paying attention to the fine print, you might not even know your time is already up.

The ESTTA Illusion: Filing ≠ Service

One of the most common missteps occurs at the very beginning: misunderstanding how service works under TTAB rules. Many practitioners assume that filing a document via ESTTA—the Board’s Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals—automatically counts as service on the opposing party. That’s not the case for most filings.

After the complaint is filed and the initial notice is sent by the TTAB, responsibility for serving every subsequent document falls on the parties themselves. According to the TTAB’s procedures and emphasized repeatedly in the TTAB Tips, service must generally be completed by email, unless otherwise agreed. Just uploading your brief, motion, or response via ESTTA does not constitute service.

Failing to serve a motion correctly doesn’t just create a procedural mess. If the opposing party never receives the motion, the Board may deny it outright, or worse, strike your filing for failure to follow service rules. Worse still, the opposing party may never respond, causing additional delays, extensions, or even sanctions. Keeping service in sync with filing is essential for a case to stay on track.

The Default Clock: When Silence Becomes Final

Few events are as devastating—and preventable—as a default judgment. Yet, many parties, particularly those without representation, miss deadlines to answer a Notice of Opposition or Petition for Cancellation. The reason is often simple: they didn’t realize the countdown had started.

When the TTAB institutes a proceeding, it emails a notification that sets the timeline in motion. Respondents typically have 40 days from the mailing date to file an answer. If that deadline is missed and no motion for an extension is filed, the Board can enter default judgment sua sponte. There’s no grace period, and “I didn’t know” is rarely enough to reopen the case.

Even seasoned practitioners sometimes get tripped up by misunderstanding when a proceeding is deemed “commenced.” The key date is not when you file—but when the Board issues the institution order. The deadlines then flow from that point forward, including pretrial disclosures, discovery, and trial periods.

The Summary Judgment Trap: Responses Are Not Optional

When a motion for summary judgment is filed, some attorneys assume the response is optional—especially if they believe genuine issues of material fact are obvious. That assumption can quickly cost them the case.

Unlike in federal court, the TTAB will grant summary judgment motions if they go unopposed. Under the Board’s rules, a party has 30 days to respond. If no response is filed, the Board may treat the motion as conceded and enter judgment accordingly.

Moreover, surreplies are not permitted, and reply briefs are optional. If you plan to argue nuance or fact-based challenges, it needs to happen in the response. Otherwise, you’re locked out. The TTAB Tips remind practitioners to prepare and file timely responses, or risk handing the other side a default win through silence.

Calculating Time: The Five-Day Myth Is Dead

A procedural shift that still trips up practitioners is the elimination of the five-day mailing grace period. Prior to 2017, parties had five extra days to respond to any document served by first-class mail. That rule no longer applies. In almost every case today, service via email means that the clock starts running immediately.

This change may seem small, but the impact is huge. A 20-day window no longer stretches to 25. A 30-day response deadline now means exactly 30 days. Courts may offer leniency for late filings due to excusable neglect, but the TTAB’s standard is considerably higher. You must show that the delay was out of your control—not the result of misreading the calendar.

The Board’s deadlines are also governed by specific counting rules. The day an order is mailed or served does not count toward the deadline, but every calendar day after does. If a deadline lands on a weekend or holiday, it rolls to the next business day. This sounds simple until you’re juggling multiple deadlines and filings—especially in ongoing disputes where a single day can trigger default or waiver.

Reopening Deadlines: Don’t Count on a Second Chance

Missing a deadline is bad. Trying to reopen it is worse. Under TTAB rules, once a deadline has passed, a party must show excusable neglect to reopen the period. That’s a significantly higher standard than the “good cause” needed to extend a deadline in advance.

Excusable neglect is not just a matter of being busy, overwhelmed, or unaware. It generally requires a showing that the deadline was missed despite reasonable diligence—and that reopening the deadline won’t prejudice the other side. Courts have applied the Pioneer factors in assessing these motions, and the TTAB has been clear: failing to docket a date or monitor filings is not a valid excuse.

As the TTAB Tips emphasize, the best practice is to ask for an extension before the deadline passes. Once you’re on the wrong side of a missed date, the Board’s discretion becomes much harder to sway.

Final Thoughts: Treat Every Date Like a Deadline

Practicing before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is a unique mix of litigation and agency procedure. Unlike federal court, there is no judge nudging the case along, no clerk reminding you of hearings, and no leeway for procedural stumbles. The Board expects practitioners to know the rules, manage the calendar, and execute their responsibilities without prompting.

That’s why TTAB timing rules are among the most quietly dangerous elements of trademark litigation. They don’t make noise. They don’t give warnings. But they can end a case faster than a losing argument ever could.

The message is clear: if you want to succeed before the TTAB, you need more than strong advocacy. You need a flawless command of procedure—starting with the clock.