Liquid Death allulose lawsuits · Last reviewed · Cross-checked sources
Truty et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc.
A proposed class action challenging “0g Sugar” and “Zero Sugar” claims on Liquid Death Sparkling Energy drinks, as reported in reviewed sources. Filed September 10, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Where it stands
Pending, as reported by a secondary tracker
As of October 3, 2026. Basis: recent secondary tracker report. A current secondary tracker reports the case pending. This is not a substitute for a complete same-day PACER docket.
Bought Liquid Death Sparkling Energy drinks? Share your purchase with a law firm reviewing these claims.Share your purchase
How Franco applies here
By court
Persuasive
This case is in the Ninth Circuit. Franco v. Chobani is a Seventh Circuit ruling, so it does not bind this court.
By rule: 0g Sugar, Zero Sugar
Addressed
The sugar-free rule, § 101.60(c)(1), which Franco v. Chobani addressed. Rule cited: 21 C.F.R. §§ 101.13, 101.60(c)(1).
What the complaint challenges
According to reviewed sources, the complaint challenges “0g Sugar” and “Zero Sugar” claims on Liquid Death Sparkling Energy drinks. This is the wording as reported in those sources. It has not yet been checked against the complaint or the package itself.
Our record groups this as 0g Sugar and Zero Sugar. The related federal rule is 21 C.F.R. §§ 101.13, 101.60(c)(1). How these label claims differ.
Allegations are not findings of fact.
Timeline
Material events supported by sources. This is not a complete docket history.
Complaint filed.
Source: Truth in Advertising (secondary source); Justia Dockets (court-derived docket index); Truth in Advertising (secondary source)
What this case does not establish
- The complaint’s allegations are claims, not findings of fact.
- A proposed class is not a certified class. Classes certified: none identified in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
- Court-approved settlements: none identified. Claim forms: none identified. Both in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
- The pending status reflects a recent secondary tracker report. It is not a complete review of the current docket.
- Being on this page does not mean any reader qualifies for compensation. There is no claims process to join through this site.
The Liquid Death cases
Separate dockets with their own courts and procedural histories. All Liquid Death allulose lawsuits.
Filed after Franco
Verified Liquid Death cases by filing date, July 27, 2026 to October 3, 2026. All four filed within 7 weeks of the ruling.
- Jul 27, 2026Franco v. Chobani: the Seventh Circuit reverses the dismissal
- Aug 24, 2026 · N.D. Cal.Williamson v. Supplying Demand, Inc.
- Sep 4, 2026 · N.D. Cal.Loar et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc.
- Sep 10, 2026 · C.D. Cal.Truty et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc. This case
- Sep 14, 2026 · M.D. Fla.Mears et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc. d/b/a Liquid Death
3 cases, newest filing first
| Filed | Case | Wording challenged | Court | Latest supported status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mears et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc. d/b/a Liquid DeathNo. 26-cv-2674 | “0g Sugar”“Zero Sugar” | M.D. Fla. | Reported pending | |
| Loar et al. v. Supplying Demand, Inc.No. 26-cv-9703 | “0g Sugar”“Zero Sugar” | N.D. Cal. | Reported pending | |
| Williamson v. Supplying Demand, Inc.No. 4:26-cv-08839 | “0g Sugar”“Zero Sugar” | N.D. Cal. | Complaint filed |
No cases match these filters. If you bought a product that isn’t here, you can still share your purchase.
Background reading
Source record
Primary and court-derived sources are listed first. Secondary reporting is used for discovery and cross-checking.
- Truty v. Supplying Demand, Inc.Court-derived docket index · Justia Dockets · Sep 10, 2026 · Reviewed Oct 3, 2026
- Liquid Death Sparkling Energy DrinksSecondary source · Truth in Advertising · Reviewed Oct 3, 2026