Equity aids the vigilant, not those who sleep upon their rights. The neglect to do a thing in proper season is called laches and is one of the unpardonable sins [...], Most torts have a statute of limitations, a time limit barring delayed lawsuits. Registered trademark infringement, however, has no statute of limitations, and defendants rely on laches to bar inexcusably delayed lawsuits. This ambiguous and complicated standard fails to notify litigants as to when an infringement claim is time-barred and leads to unnecessary and expensive litigation. Unlike laches, however, a statute of limitations is a bright-line rule that is easily adjudicated. This Comment examines the potential benefits of a bright-line statute of limitations in trademark infringement versus the current, ambiguous laches standard. Trademark infringement litigants would likely see the same benefits as those realized in patent and copyright infringement. In recent decades, Congress has replaced laches with statutes of limitations for these torts. The length of permissible delay in bringing a suit is now clearer compared to laches. This clear notice means futile claims are never filed, and timely claims can be confidently pursued without fear of dismissal. The result is improved litigation efficiency and reduced legal costs. Trademark owners should have this same clear notice. The ambiguity of laches was recently magnified by the Fourth Circuit's 2021 decision in Belmora v. Bayer. (1) For decades, courts had dealt with the laches time limit ambiguity by imputing on trademark infringement claims the statute of limitations from the most closely analogous state law tort. The Fourth Circuit in Bayer, however, declared this imputed statute of limitations to no longer be a "legal standard" in trademark infringement cases. (2) What, then, is the allowable delay in the Fourth Circuit? Will other circuits also reject the imputed statute of limitations? With these questions unanswered, the ambiguity of the laches defense in trademark infringement is worse than ever. With this increased laches ambiguity, and the promise of the same litigation efficiencies as realized in patent and copyright, this Comment proposes a statute of limitations for trademark infringement. Congress should amend the Lanham Act governing trademark protection as the American Bar Association (ABA) recommended in 1971. With trademark registration numbers booming, now is the time to revisit the ABA's four-year statute of limitations proposal.