Practicing before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) is not just about persuasive arguments or solid legal claims—it’s about precision, preparedness, and procedural fluency. While many attorneys focus their energy on crafting compelling briefs, seasoned TTAB practitioners know that success often hinges on the quiet, technical details that surround the written word.

In its July 2020 practice advisory, the TTAB pulled back the curtain on what its judges and interlocutory attorneys see regularly—both the good and the problematic. These TTAB tips offer more than mere reminders; they reflect how the Board expects trademark litigators to operate in a modern, digital-first environment. Understanding and internalizing these expectations is critical to not only avoid pitfalls but to enhance your credibility and effectiveness in every phase of a proceeding.

Mastery of Procedure Is Not Optional

At the TTAB, the rules are not mere suggestions. Every case—whether an ex parte appeal or inter partes litigation—functions within a rigid procedural framework governed by the Trademark Rules, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the TBMP (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure). When litigators fail to adhere to this structure, the consequences are swift. Missed deadlines, defective filings, and incorrect service methods are rarely forgiven, especially when the rules and systems to comply are clear and accessible.

TTAB judges and attorneys consistently see practitioners overlook or misunderstand basic procedural requirements—such as failing to properly enter third-party registrations into the record or submitting untimely evidence. These errors not only weaken a party’s case but can cast doubt on counsel’s familiarity with TTAB practice, which may influence how the Board engages with future filings.

TTABVUE and ESTTA: Tools You Must Command

Effective advocacy before the TTAB starts with digital fluency. The Board’s entire workflow is driven through two systems: ESTTA (Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals) and TTABVUE, the docketing interface. TTAB judges and staff rely on these tools as the official record of proceedings, which means practitioners must as well.

Every document filed through ESTTA is time-stamped, logged, and integrated into the case’s TTABVUE history. If a filing fails to appear in the docket, it’s incumbent on the filer to report the issue with the assigned ESTTA tracking number. There is no room for assumptions that something “went through.” The Board expects counsel to verify docket entries and to manage correspondence addresses carefully. Emails are now the primary mode of communication, and failure to monitor them—due to spam filters or outdated contact info—is treated as the fault of the party.

The takeaway is clear: know how to use ESTTA, check TTABVUE often, and keep communication channels open.

Evidence Must Be Clean, Timely, and Properly Submitted

The TTAB has made it abundantly clear that not all evidence is created equal. A recurring error among practitioners is submitting lists or summaries of third-party registrations without making the underlying documents of record. Commercial search reports, charts, or mere references to TESS listings are insufficient. The Board won’t take judicial notice of USPTO databases or cited registration files unless proper printouts from TESS or TSDR are submitted into the record during examination or trial.

Another issue concerns Internet evidence. Submissions that lack a URL and the date of access or printing will not be accepted. Even when this requirement is met, the Board may still assess the weight of cached or outdated website pages. Citing links in briefs is not enough either; the evidence must be uploaded and made part of the record.

Equally important is the Board’s stance on timing. Evidence should never be attached to an appeal brief. Once a notice of appeal is filed, the record is closed. Attempting to add exhibits or new materials at that stage violates the rules and can severely damage your case. If you truly need to introduce new evidence post-appeal, you must file a request for remand—and even then, it’s discretionary.

Professionalism in Pleadings and Motion Practice

According to the TTAB tips, litigators often misuse standard defenses or clutter pleadings with boilerplate language that adds little legal value. For example, raising “failure to state a claim” as an affirmative defense is almost always stricken. Likewise, inserting allegations of trademark infringement or unfair competition into TTAB complaints overreaches the Board’s jurisdiction and reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of its role.

Strong pleadings should be concise, focused, and rooted in the proper statutory language. Claims like likelihood of confusion, dilution, or abandonment must be supported by specific factual allegations—not generalized grievances. Pleading multiple claims? Use separate headings and structure each cause clearly.

Motion practice deserves the same level of care. Whether moving to dismiss, compel discovery, or extend deadlines, parties must avoid last-minute filings or speculative justifications. The Board looks for good cause in extension requests and excusable neglect when deadlines are missed. The more routine your motion, the more the Board expects it to follow established norms.

Settlement, Suspension, and Strategic Cooperation

While TTAB litigation is adversarial, the Board strongly encourages cooperation—especially in discovery and scheduling. Many cases are resolved through settlement, and the Board has designed flexible procedures to accommodate this. But settlement negotiations do not excuse missed deadlines. If parties are engaged in talks, they should stipulate to suspend proceedings formally. Repeated extensions with vague claims of “ongoing discussions” will eventually prompt the Board to demand evidence of real progress.

The same applies to discovery disputes. The Board frequently sees unnecessary motion practice that could have been avoided with a basic meet-and-confer session. TTAB judges expect a genuine good-faith effort before entertaining motions to compel. A single email does not suffice. Calls, written exchanges, and attempts at compromise must be documented.

The Final Word: Consistency, Clarity, and Respect for the Process

If there’s a unifying message in the TTAB’s internal guidance, it’s that the Board values clarity, professionalism, and a respect for process. This isn’t a forum where charm or theatrics win cases. Instead, success comes from submitting a clean, well-supported record, making timely and appropriate filings, and avoiding shortcuts.

Practitioners who internalize these TTAB tips not only strengthen their current matters—they build long-term credibility with the Board. That credibility, in a forum where so much rests on written submissions and procedural compliance, is worth more than a dozen persuasive paragraphs.

The best litigators before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board know that every detail matters—and they treat every filing, from the first notice to the final brief, like it’s the one that will decide the case.