{"id":1243,"date":"2026-04-09T17:58:55","date_gmt":"2026-04-09T08:58:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pickle-times.com\/news\/joola-patent-lawsuit-propulsion-core-11-brands\/"},"modified":"2026-06-15T16:02:00","modified_gmt":"2026-06-15T07:02:00","slug":"joola-patent-lawsuit-propulsion-core-11-brands","status":"publish","type":"news","link":"https:\/\/pickle-times.com\/en\/news\/joola-patent-lawsuit-propulsion-core-11-brands\/","title":{"rendered":"JOOLA sues 11 paddle makers all at once for patent infringement\u2014over its Propulsion Core technology, major brands including Adidas and Franklin are sued at the ITC"},"content":{"rendered":"

A shock ran through the pickleball paddle market. On April 7, 2026, citing unauthorized use of its patented Propulsion Core technology, JOOLAFranklin Sports<\/a>\u3001Adidas Pickleball<\/a>\u3001Engage Pickleball<\/a>\u3001Paddletek<\/a>sued 11 paddle makers at once at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). It is the largest intellectual property lawsuit ever in the pickleball industry, and it has escalated into a situation where the very definition of a \u201cGen 3 paddle\u201d is being called into question.<\/p>\n

Overview of the suit: who are the 11 companies?<\/h2>\n

The 11 companies JOOLA sued are as follows.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Franklin Sports<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. Adidas Pickleball<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. Engage Pickleball<\/a><\/li>\n
  4. Paddletek<\/a><\/li>\n
  5. Proton Sports<\/a><\/li>\n
  6. RPM Pickleball<\/a><\/li>\n
  7. Friday Labs<\/a><\/li>\n
  8. Diadem Sports<\/a><\/li>\n
  9. Facolos<\/a><\/li>\n
  10. ProXR Pickleball<\/a><\/li>\n
  11. Volair<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Worth noting is the fact that this list does not includeSelkirk<\/a>. Selkirk\u2019s latest \u201cEra Power\u201d series has a full-coverage design that covers the entire core with foam and differs technically from the \u201cU-shaped perimeter foam structure\u201d JOOLA takes issue with, so it is excluded from the suit. Meanwhile,Diadem<\/a>andthe core technologies of each company<\/a>have come under direct scrutiny.<\/p>\n

    The point of contention: what is Propulsion Core technology?<\/h2>\n

    Propulsion Core is a patented technology JOOLA brought to market in 2024 as a \u201cGen 3\u201d paddle. Whereas conventional pickleball paddles were made of a polypropylene honeycomb core alone, Propulsion Core places EVA foam in a horseshoe shape (U-shape) in the upper half of the core. This gives the paddle\u2019s hitting surface a controlled, \u201cdiving-board\u201d-like elasticity, allowing powerful drives and speed-up shots without increasing swing speed.<\/p>\n

    JOOLA achieved great commercial success with product lines featuring this technology, including the Hyperion and Perseus series, as well as the MOD TA-15, 3S, 3S Dual, Pro IV, and Pro V.Ben Johns<\/a>As many top pros, including these players, used Gen 3 paddles, the technology quickly came to be recognized as the \u201cstandard for power paddles.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Why sue now\u2014behind two years of \u201csilence\u201d<\/h2>\n

    JOOLA announced its Gen 3 paddle in 2024. In the roughly two years since, many makers in the industry have released, one after another, paddles adopting a similar U-shaped perimeter foam structure. According to The Kitchen\u2019s reporting, in just two years the Gen 3 paddle transformed from \u201cJOOLA\u2019s exclusive innovation\u201d into an \u201cindustry standard.\u201d<\/p>\n

    On this two years of silence, JOOLA CEO Richard Lee commented in an official statement that \u201cthis is not a reflexive reaction but a principled decision.\u201d He emphasized that the patent examination and registration process took time and that the suit was filed only after giving competitors the \u201copportunity to develop their own technology.\u201d<\/p>\n

    Lee went on to say, \u201cProtecting innovation is not about restricting others\u2019 activities. It is about ensuring that the investment, creativity, and engineering needed to move this sport forward remain sustainable.\u201d<\/p>\n

    What filing at the ITC means\u2014not just a claim for damages<\/h2>\n

    JOOLA\u2019s choice of the ITC (International Trade Commission) as the venue carries great strategic significance. Unlike the federal courts, the ITC is a body with the authority to issue orders to block the \u201cimport into the United States\u201d of patent-infringing goods. In other words, if JOOLA wins, the paddles of the 11 defendants could be physically excluded from the U.S. market.<\/p>\n

    Pickleball paddles are in many cases manufactured at factories in China or Taiwan. A win at the ITC has the power to halt imports into the U.S. from these factories themselves, so it could be more damaging to the defendant companies than monetary damages in federal court.Combined with the tightening of paddle testing being advanced by USA Pickleball,<\/a>quality control and IP protection in the paddle industry are drawing attention at an unprecedented level.<\/p>\n

    Ripples through the industry\u2014what is the impact on players?<\/h2>\n

    This lawsuit will not immediately affect ordinary players. Paddles already purchased will not become unusable, andunder the 2026 USAP rules<\/a>as well, the patent status of the paddle you use is not subject to regulation.<\/p>\n

    In the medium to long term, however, the following effects are expected.<\/p>\n

    Higher paddle prices<\/strong>
    If defendant companies agree to pay licensing fees, those costs are likely to be passed on to product prices. The price range of Gen 3 paddles, currently mostly 150 to 250 dollars, could shift upward.<\/p>\n

    Accelerating technical differentiation<\/strong>
    If the U-shaped foam structure can no longer be used, each company will have to develop its own core technology. Approaches different from Propulsion Core, like Selkirk\u2019s full-coverage foam or Carbon\u2019s thermoforming technology, will likely increase.    The weight balance of paddles<\/a>and their feel should also diversify further going forward.<\/p>\n

    Barriers to entry for emerging brands<\/strong>
    For emerging brands that entered the market by \u201cimitating\u201d Gen 3 technology, the cost of license negotiations or in-house development becomes a barrier to entry. In some cases, brands without financial strength may be forced to withdraw from the market.<\/p>\n

    Reactions from the 11 defendant companies<\/h2>\n

    According to The Kitchen\u2019s reporting, the outlet sought comment from all 11 defendants but stated that \u201cas of the time of publication, no response had been obtained from any of the companies.\u201d Franklin Sports had just announceda major deal between world No. 1 Anna Leigh Waters and Nike,<\/a>and how the company responds to JOOLA\u2019s suit is drawing attention across the whole industry.<\/p>\n

    What happens next<\/h2>\n

    ITC proceedings usually take 12 to 18 months. Whether JOOLA will also sue in federal court in parallel is not clear at this point, but given its official statement that it is seeking protection through a comprehensive IP portfolio including \u201cutility patents, design patents, trademarks, and copyrights,\u201d there is ample possibility that additional legal action will be taken.<\/p>\n

    As pickleball continues its rapid growth, the IP war over paddle technology will likely intensify further. What innovation will emerge after Gen 3\u2014this lawsuit throws that question at the entire industry.<\/p>\n

    FAQ<\/h2>\n

    Q. Will the Gen 3 paddle I currently own become unusable?<\/h3>\n

    No, paddles you have already purchased are unaffected. The lawsuit concerns manufacturing, importing, and selling; personal use is not covered. Use in tournaments is also fine as long as your USAP approval remains valid.<\/p>\n

    Q. If JOOLA wins, will I no longer be able to buy other companies\u2019 Gen 3 paddles?<\/h3>\n

    If the ITC issues an import-blocking order, imports of the affected paddles into the U.S. could be prohibited. However, if each company signs a license agreement or changes its design to develop non-infringing products, sales can continue.<\/p>\n

    Q. Why is Selkirk not being sued?<\/h3>\n

    Selkirk\u2019s latest \u201cEra Power\u201d series adopts a full-coverage design that covers the entire core with foam, which differs technically from the U-shaped perimeter foam structure JOOLA claims in its patent.<\/p>\n

    Sources<\/h2>\n