Magic Spoon allulose lawsuits

Magic Spoon is a useful example of why an allulose litigation tracker needs more than a list of search results.

Two Magic Spoon cases currently meet our standard for inclusion in our verified allulose counts:

• Freifeld v. Magic Spoon, Inc., filed in the Northern District of Illinois on August 18, 2026; and
• Royal v. Magic Spoon Inc., filed in the same court on September 10, 2026.

Those cases do not challenge identical label language, and one has already been voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.

Other Magic Spoon dockets exist, but we have not promoted them into the verified allulose count because the allulose theory is not yet supported strongly enough under our source policy.

That distinction is the point of this page.

The Magic Spoon allulose cases we currently count

The federal docket index confirms Freifeld was filed August 18, 2026 before Judge Steven C. Seeger. (Justia docket)

The federal docket index confirms Royal was filed September 10, 2026 before Judge Lindsay C. Jenkins. (Justia docket)

Freifeld: the "0 g Total Sugars" case

Trade reporting describes Freifeld as challenging Magic Spoon cereal packaging that advertised "0 g total sugars" while the cereal was sweetened with allulose.

SupplySide Food & Beverage Journal reports that the complaint alleged 10 grams of allulose per serving and argued the zero-sugar message was deceptive. That report is secondary reporting about the complaint, not a judicial finding. (SupplySide Food & Beverage Journal)

The case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on September 22, 2026, according to the same report.

"Without prejudice" matters. It generally means the dismissal itself does not operate as a merits judgment barring a future filing of the same claim solely because of that dismissal.

The report speculates that an informal settlement is possible but says the lawyers and Magic Spoon did not explain why the case was dropped. We therefore do not classify the dismissal as a settlement.

Royal: a different claim theory

Royal reportedly challenges Magic Spoon Protein Cereal marketed as "0 added sugar" and "no added sugar" while containing allulose.

Law360's case index identifies the case as No. 1:26-cv-10993 in the Northern District of Illinois and describes a proposed class action alleging false labeling tied to allulose. (Law360 case index)

OpenClassActions likewise describes the case as an allulose labeling action involving "0 added sugar" and "no added sugar" claims, but notes that the complaint itself was not publicly available through the sources it reviewed. (OpenClassActions)

Because the complaint was not directly available in the primary-source set used for this page, we do not invent:

• a complete flavor list;
• the exact proposed class definition;
• a complete cause-of-action list; or
• an exact allulose quantity for every product at issue.

Those facts can be added when the underlying pleading is obtained.

Why the two verified Magic Spoon cases should not be collapsed

The cases illustrate two related but distinct regulatory theories.

Freifeld reportedly challenged "0 g Total Sugars" or sugar-free-style messaging.

Royal reportedly challenges "0 added sugar" and "no added sugar" wording.

That difference matters because federal rules distinguish between:

• claims about the amount of sugar in the food; and
• claims about whether sugar or sugar-containing ingredients were added during processing.

Section 101.60(c)(1) covers sugar-free and zero-sugar claims, while § 101.60(c)(2) addresses no-added-sugar wording and related conditions. (21 C.F.R. § 101.60)

A responsible tracker should store those as separate claim families rather than flattening both to "zero sugar."

What does Franco v. Chobani mean for Magic Spoon?

Both verified Magic Spoon cases were filed in the Northern District of Illinois.

That places them inside the Seventh Circuit, whose July 27, 2026 Franco decision held that allulose falls within the federal regulatory definition of sugar relevant to the sugar-free issue before it. (Seventh Circuit opinion)

For a court in the Northern District of Illinois, that appellate holding is binding on the legal issue it decided.

But the claim-language distinction still matters.

Royal involves reported no-added-sugar wording, governed by a separate subsection from the sugar-free claim in Franco. So Franco is highly relevant to whether allulose is a sugar, but it does not automatically decide every element of Royal.

Other Magic Spoon dockets exist, but we do not count them yet

This is where our evidence model differs from a generic lawsuit roundup.

We are also researching other Magic Spoon dockets. Their existence is verified, but their connection to allulose has not yet met our threshold for counting them.

Examples include:

The S.D.N.Y. Freifeld docket, for example, shows a complaint filed September 23, 2026 and a statement that it is related to No. 1:26-cv-07075. That proves the later case exists and is connected procedurally to another Magic Spoon case. It does not by itself prove that the complaint advances the allulose theory tracked here. (Justia docket)

Why we use a research queue

Without a research queue, it would be tempting to count every lawsuit against Magic Spoon filed in August or September as another allulose case.

That would inflate the dataset and could turn coincidence into a factual claim.

Our rule is stricter:

A docket enters the public allulose count only when reliable evidence connects that specific action to allulose and the challenged sugar-related representation.

That is why the headline number on this page may be lower than the number of Magic Spoon cases a broad web search can surface.

FDA guidance and Magic Spoon's Nutrition Facts issue

FDA's 2020 guidance allows manufacturers, through enforcement discretion, to exclude allulose from the amounts declared as Total Sugars and Added Sugars on the Nutrition Facts panel. (FDA guidance)

The current litigation asks whether front-of-package or other labeling claims communicate something that conflicts with the underlying nutrient-content rules.

That distinction is especially visible in Magic Spoon because the verified cases span both total-sugar and added-sugar language.

See Zero Sugar vs. Sugar Free vs. No Added Sugar for the claim-by-claim framework.

Current procedural status

Freifeld, N.D. Illinois

Supported status: voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on September 22, 2026, according to reporting on the filed notice.

That is a dismissal, not a court-approved settlement.

Royal, N.D. Illinois

Recent reporting describes the case as pending. The dataset does not represent that status as a complete same-day PACER docket review.

Has a Magic Spoon class been certified?

We have not identified a class-certification order in the verified Magic Spoon allulose records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.

Is there a Magic Spoon allulose settlement?

We have not identified a court-approved settlement or claim form in the verified records reviewed.

The Freifeld voluntary dismissal should not be converted into a settlement merely because the reason for dismissal is not public.

What we know and what we do not

Frequently asked questions

Last researched: October 3, 2026. Procedural status can change after this date.