What’s the Score?
The rapidly expanding pickleball equipment market has hit a legal flashpoint in California. CRBN Pickleball, a leading paddle manufacturer, has filed a formal patent infringement lawsuit against competitor Vatic Pro. Filed on December 17 in the California Central District Court, the lawsuit alleges that Vatic Pro’s “V-Sol Power” paddle infringes on CRBN’s proprietary technology. The dispute centres on the “foam core” construction method, a technology CRBN claims to have pioneered and protected with U.S. Patent No. 12,465,827.
Hit it deeper!
The conflict marks a significant escalation in the competitive paddle manufacturing space. According to the court filing, the controversy specifically targets the Vatic Pro V-Sol Power model, which was released in September. CRBN alleges that this model utilises a full-foam core design that mimics their “TruFoam” technology—an innovation they introduced with their Genesis line in early 2025.
CRBN owners Garrett Gosselin and Kyle Goguen issued a statement emphasizing that litigation was a last resort. They claim to have reached out to Vatic Pro directly to provide “early notice” regarding the patent before it was officially issued, hoping to allow the competitor an opportunity to adjust their designs. “After the patent was granted, we again sought to engage in a constructive discussion to resolve the matter without litigation,” the owners stated. However, they report that these attempts failed to generate cooperation, leaving them “no alternative but to take steps to protect our intellectual property”.
At the heart of the technical dispute is the construction of the paddle core. CRBN’s patent covers specific attributes of their foam core designs. Industry observers note distinct similarities and subtle differences between the products; the Vatic Pro V-Sol Power features an “indented foam core,” while the V-Sol Pro is described as having a “fully foam core” without indents.
CRBN argues that the lawsuit is about more than just one product; it is about protecting the significant capital and time invested in research and development. “From day one, we’ve invested deeply in research and development to create truly original paddle technology rather than relying on off-the-shelf solutions,” Gosselin and Goguen said. They argue that protecting this intellectual property is essential for the long-term health of the sport, especially as counterfeit brands on marketplaces like Temu and Alibaba have already begun targeting their designs.
Vatic Pro has responded cautiously. CEO Daryl Wang acknowledged the gravity of the situation, stating, “Vatic Pro takes all intellectual property issues seriously and intends to respond through the appropriate legal process”. Wang declined further comment on the ongoing matter but assured customers that the company remains focused on serving them.
The World Pickleball Verdict
This lawsuit represents a maturing “growing pain” for the pickleball industry. As the sport moves away from generic, off-the-shelf manufacturing toward high-tech, proprietary engineering, legal battles over intellectual property were inevitable. CRBN’s aggressive stance signals that established brands are no longer willing to tolerate look-alikes or “fast-follow” engineering. If CRBN prevails, it could set a precedent that forces smaller manufacturers to invest more heavily in original R&D or risk extinction. Conversely, a win for Vatic Pro could open the floodgates for more variations of foam-core technology, potentially lowering prices for consumers but squeezing margins for innovators. The outcome will likely define the boundaries of innovation and imitation in pickleball for years to come.
Chris Beaumont
Founder and Editor-in-ChiefChris Beaumont is the founder and Editor-in-Chief of World Pickleball Magazine. Chris follows the global game closely, reporting on the latest news, developments, stories and tournaments from all five continents. He also hosts the World Pickleball Podcast, interviewing people at…
View All Articles →
