Mere Consumers Lack Commercial Interest and Statutory Standing to Challenge Trademark Registration

In Curtin v. United Trademark Holdings, Inc., No. 2023-2050 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s dismissal of Rebecca Curtin’s opposition to United Trademark Holding’s registration of the mark “RAPUNZEL” for dolls and toy figures.

Ms. Curtin, an allegedly interested doll collector and consumer, opposed the mark as generic, descriptive, failing to function as a trademark, and fraudulent. Ms. Curtin alleged injury due to being “denied access to healthy marketplace competition” for products representing Rapunzel. But the TTAB concluded that, as a mere consumer, Ms. Curtin lacked statutory standing to oppose registration under 15 U.S.C. § 1063.

The Federal Circuit agreed, finding the zone-of-interests test in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 572 U.S. 118 (2014) controlled. The Court agreed with the TTAB’s holding that, under this test, “only commercial actors affected by the mark’s registration . . . [may] oppose the registration as generic, descriptive, or functional,” and Ms. Curtin did not qualify. The Court also found Ms. Curtin’s alleged injury that the “RAPUNZEL” mark would adversely affect marketplace competition was “too remote” and “entirely speculative.”