Trademark litigation before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) can feel like a race against the clock. From the moment a proceeding begins, parties are placed on a rigid procedural timeline that governs every phase of the case—from disclosures to discovery, trial, and final briefs. While the TTAB’s efficiency is one of its strengths, it can also be one of its greatest challenges for legal practitioners.

The TTAB does not tolerate missed deadlines lightly. In fact, a failure to comply with even a single procedural deadline—whether it’s serving initial disclosures, filing a brief, or responding to a motion—can result in consequences ranging from adverse rulings to complete dismissal. However, meeting these strict timelines doesn’t mean rushing or sacrificing quality. With a clear strategy and awareness of the Board’s expectations, it is entirely possible to litigate effectively under time pressure.

The key is understanding how the TTAB’s design shapes your litigation strategy and leveraging that design in your favor.

Why TTAB Deadlines Are Different

Unlike federal courts, where pretrial motions and status conferences can reset or reconfigure the litigation calendar, the TTAB operates under a pre-established schedule issued at the outset of the proceeding. These deadlines are automatically generated when the Board institutes an opposition or cancellation and are enforced unless the parties stipulate to changes or seek an extension with good cause.

This structured schedule covers several critical stages: the deadline for initial disclosures, the close of discovery, the opening and close of each party’s trial period, and the deadline for final briefs. These aren’t arbitrary dates—they are the scaffolding of your entire case. Missing them doesn’t just inconvenience the Board; it may permanently exclude your evidence from the record or cause your claims and defenses to be waived.

As outlined in various TTAB Tips, the Board places high importance on adherence to timelines and rarely grants relief absent a compelling showing of excusable neglect.

Planning Ahead: The First Line of Defense

Meeting TTAB deadlines begins long before the due dates arrive. As soon as a proceeding is initiated, the parties should review the trial schedule and backward-plan key tasks. This includes identifying the evidence you’ll need to collect, who will testify, and what deadlines apply for serving discovery or filing motions.

For example, the discovery period typically spans several months, but waiting until the final weeks to issue discovery requests is risky. Not only does it leave no time to resolve disputes or compel responses, but it also increases the likelihood that critical facts or documents will not be included in your case record. Likewise, waiting until your trial period begins to begin drafting testimony or compiling exhibits can leave you scrambling to meet the final submission deadline.

In short, successful TTAB litigators don’t treat deadlines as targets—they treat them as the last possible safety net. The real work should be done well in advance.

Motion Practice and the Risk of Delay

The TTAB allows parties to file various pretrial and trial motions, including motions to dismiss, to compel discovery, or for summary judgment. While these motions can be powerful tools, they also come with procedural timing requirements that cannot be ignored.

For instance, a motion to compel discovery must be filed before the discovery period closes. A motion for summary judgment must typically be filed before the deadline for the plaintiff’s trial period opens. Failing to track these interlocking timelines can lead to motions being denied as untimely—regardless of their merit.

One particularly critical area is the opposition or response window for motions. Under TTAB rules, if a party fails to respond to a motion within the prescribed time (usually 20 or 30 days, depending on the type of motion), the motion may be granted as conceded. This default rule underscores the Board’s preference for procedural order and timely conduct.

According to repeated guidance in TTAB Tips, one of the most common—and preventable—errors is missing an opposition deadline simply due to docketing failures. A robust docketing system and regular internal reviews are essential for any attorney managing active TTAB proceedings.

Testimony Periods: No Room for Error

Perhaps the most unique aspect of TTAB litigation is its “testimony periods.” Unlike a courtroom trial where live witnesses appear, TTAB trials are conducted entirely on the written record. Each party has a designated window in which to submit declarations, discovery depositions, and other admissible evidence. These windows do not automatically reopen if something is missed.

For example, if a party’s trial period closes without having submitted any testimony or documents, that party may find itself unable to prove its claims or defenses. Reopening a testimony period is possible, but only under the strict standard of excusable neglect, which the Board evaluates using the Pioneer factors. Demonstrating good faith alone is not enough; the party must show that the failure to act was not within its reasonable control and that the delay did not prejudice the other side.

This places tremendous pressure on attorneys to ensure all necessary submissions are finalized and filed during their designated window. It also means that relying on last-minute filings or extensions is a dangerous strategy.

Extensions and Suspensions: Use with Caution

The TTAB allows parties to request extensions of time or suspend proceedings under certain circumstances—commonly for settlement discussions, pending civil litigation, or agreed procedural accommodations. These tools can be invaluable for managing caseloads or giving parties time to negotiate resolution outside of trial.

However, the Board is increasingly watchful of parties that abuse these requests. TTAB Tips have emphasized that repeated or indefinite suspensions, especially without clear status updates or legitimate justification, may result in the Board resuming proceedings unilaterally.

If you do seek an extension or suspension, make sure the request is grounded in procedural necessity or legitimate negotiations. Include specific facts and avoid vague references to “settlement discussions.” The more transparent and timely your request, the more likely the Board will grant it.

Procedural Precision Under Pressure

One of the enduring themes from TTAB Tips is that procedural precision matters—especially when deadlines are looming. Practitioners who rush filings or submit evidence improperly (such as using hyperlinks instead of TSDR printouts) may discover that the Board does not consider those materials part of the record.

Quality should never be sacrificed for speed. Instead, build internal systems that allow for early drafting, careful review, and compliance with the TBMP. Doing so ensures that even under tight timelines, your submissions are polished, accurate, and fully admissible.

Final Thoughts

TTAB litigation may feel like it moves on rails—and in many ways, it does. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board has crafted a streamlined and rule-bound process that promotes efficiency and discourages delay. But for practitioners, that means the margin for error is slim.

Navigating this fast-moving process successfully requires proactive planning, an intimate understanding of the TTAB’s procedural framework, and disciplined execution. Meeting the Board’s deadlines doesn’t mean cutting corners—it means treating deadlines as strategic mile markers, not as panic buttons.

By internalizing the lessons found throughout the Board’s own TTAB Tips, attorneys can master the art of timely litigation and deliver strong, effective results for their clients—without ever falling off the clock.