The parties and the patents
The case is Acushnet Company v. Cole Haan LLC, No. 1:26-cv-14592 (D. Mass.). Acushnet asserts U.S. Patent 11,019,874, Golf Shoe Having Outsole With All-Surface Traction Zones, and U.S. Patent 12,075,887, Golf Shoes Having Multi-Surface Traction Outsoles. The complaint ties both to Acushnet's VersaTrax technology.
What the patents cover
Claim 1 of the '874 patent covers a golf shoe whose outsole has a first set of spiral pathways, each radiating from a point of origin in segments of different curvature, and a second set that is the inverse of the first, so that when the two sets are superposed their sub-segments form four-sided tile pieces carrying protruding traction members. Claim 1 of the '887 patent adds, to the same superposed spiral layout, four outsole zones (lateral forefoot, medial rear-foot, medial forefoot, and lateral rear-foot) with at least two different hardness values.
What the complaint alleges
The complaint says Cole Haan introduced the GrandPro All-Day Golf shoes for Spring 2026 and markets them as having spikeless rubber outsoles for traction on and off the course. It alleges, on information and belief, that the outsoles have the claimed spiral pathways and tile pieces and, for the '887 patent, four zones with at least two hardness values. It says Cole Haan has had actual knowledge since the August 12, 2026 letter and alleges willful infringement. Venue is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b) based on Cole Haan outlet stores in Lee, Somerville, and Wrentham, Massachusetts.
Relief requested
Acushnet asks for a judgment of infringement, a permanent injunction under 35 U.S.C. 283 lasting until the patents expire, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 including lost profits or a reasonable royalty, an accounting, pre- and post-judgment interest, a finding of willfulness with a three-fold enhancement of damages, and fees, costs, and expenses under 35 U.S.C. 285. The complaint demands a jury trial.
What it means
This is a competitor suit. The complaint describes a pre-suit exchange but does not attach the letters, and it rests Cole Haan's knowledge, and so its willfulness theory, on the August 12 letter, which it says Cole Haan answered with an August 24 denial, 58 and 46 days before the filing. A central infringement question is whether a spikeless pattern meets the claims' specific geometry of normal and inverse spiral sets forming four-sided tiles. The complaint anticipates that dispute, alleging that the tiles' four sides are set by the pathway sub-segments rather than the shape of the traction members, and that pathways that curve somewhat sinusoidally are still spiral pathways.
What to watch next
Watch for Cole Haan's answer and any counterclaims, any preliminary injunction motion, and any inter partes review petitions.