TTAB Center Adds Summary Judgment, Motions to Strike, and Appeal Filings: What Trademark Litigants Should Change Now
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office expanded TTAB Center again on August 18, 2026, adding several filing options that matter in active Trademark Trial and Appeal Board cases. Parties can now use TTAB Center to file motions or cross-motions for summary judgment, requests for discovery to respond to summary-judgment motions, motions to strike, motions to review a Board order or decision, and copies of notices of appeal from Board decisions.
The update is part of the USPTO’s transition away from the Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA). The agency’s August 18 TTAB Center announcement makes clear that the migration is continuing and that practitioners should expect additional filing functions to move into the newer system.
What changed on August 18?
According to the USPTO, TTAB Center now supports five categories of filings that previously required practitioners to use other available TTAB filing paths:
- motions and cross-motions for summary judgment;
- requests for discovery needed to respond to a summary-judgment motion;
- motions to strike;
- motions to review a Board order or decision; and
- copies of notices of appeal from Board decisions.
These are not merely administrative filings. Summary judgment, motions to strike, review requests, and appeals can shape the entire course of an opposition or cancellation proceeding. For parties litigating before the TTAB, the practical question is no longer simply “what must be filed?” but also “where must it be filed, what information does the system require, and what confirmation proves the filing was accepted?”
Why the filing-system transition matters
A change in filing platform does not rewrite the substantive trademark rules, but it can create procedural risk. TTAB proceedings are deadline-driven. A strong likelihood-of-confusion argument will not cure a missed deadline, an incomplete filing, or a filing submitted through an unavailable path.
Businesses involved in trademark oppositions and cancellations should treat the TTAB Center transition as a docketing issue as well as a technology issue. Internal procedures should identify which system is currently authorized for a particular filing and should preserve the electronic receipt and the filed PDF.
Summary judgment now has a more direct TTAB Center path
Summary judgment can be a powerful tool when a material issue can be resolved without a full trial record. In a trademark opposition or cancellation, a party may seek summary judgment on issues such as priority, likelihood of confusion, entitlement to a statutory cause of action, abandonment, or another dispositive issue depending on the pleadings and evidence.
The August update also expressly adds a filing option for a request for discovery to respond to a summary-judgment motion. That is important because a party opposing summary judgment sometimes needs targeted discovery before it can fairly respond to the moving party’s evidence. The availability of a dedicated filing path should make the procedural posture clearer, but it does not eliminate the need to establish why the requested discovery is necessary.
Parties should still focus on the evidentiary record. A TTAB motion is not won because it was filed in the correct portal. Declarations, authenticated evidence, discovery responses, admissions, deposition testimony, registration records, and other admissible materials remain central to the merits.
Motions to strike can shape the case early
A motion to strike may target an insufficient defense, redundant matter, scandalous matter, or another pleading issue. In TTAB litigation, parties sometimes devote too much attention to the merits of the mark and too little attention to the pleadings that define what the case actually includes.
The new TTAB Center filing option is a good reminder to review an answer promptly. If an asserted defense is legally insufficient, addressing it early may narrow discovery and prevent unnecessary motion practice later. Conversely, a party answering an opposition or cancellation should avoid boilerplate defenses that lack a factual or legal basis.
Review requests and appeals require a clean record
The USPTO also added filing options for motions to review a Board order or decision and for submitting a copy of a notice of appeal. Those functions sit near the point where TTAB practice can intersect with federal appellate or district-court litigation.
A final TTAB decision can generally be challenged through an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or, in circumstances authorized by statute, through a civil action in federal district court. The choice of route can have major consequences, including whether the case is confined to the agency record or can involve additional evidence.
For that reason, parties should build the record with the possibility of review in mind. Evidence omitted during the TTAB proceeding may be difficult or impossible to rely on later depending on the review path.
Practical filing checklist during the transition
For each significant TTAB filing, a useful workflow is to confirm the current filing mechanism before the deadline, prepare the filing in final form before opening the portal, verify all party and proceeding information, upload the correct document, review the system-generated confirmation, and save the receipt with the litigation file.
For deadline-sensitive filings, counsel should also know the USPTO’s outage procedures. System maintenance and unavailability can occur, and the agency publishes separate guidance for filing TTAB documents during an outage. Waiting until the final minutes of a filing deadline creates avoidable risk.
What trademark owners should do now
If your business is already in a TTAB case, update your internal filing checklist and confirm that the people responsible for docketing know which filings have moved to TTAB Center. If you are considering an opposition or cancellation, do not wait for the filing deadline to learn the system.
Tucker Law represents trademark owners and applicants in trademark matters, including registration, monitoring, infringement issues, and TTAB proceedings. The firm’s broader intellectual-property practice can also address related ownership, licensing, and litigation issues when a trademark dispute overlaps with other IP rights.
This article is general information, not legal advice. TTAB deadlines and available procedures depend on the specific proceeding, order, and applicable rules.
