Products containing allulose named in current labeling lawsuits

Allulose is used across a wide range of reduced-sugar foods and drinks.

But a product containing allulose is not automatically a sued product, and a sued product is not automatically mislabeled.

The current litigation focuses on products that combine allulose with sugar-related claims such as "Zero Sugar," "Sugar Free," "0g Sugar," "Zero Added Sugar," "No Added Sugar" or similar language.

Current verified product landscape

As of October 3, 2026, we track:

• 58 verified or cross-checked cases;
• 27 verified brands;
• 28 verified product groups;
• litigation involving categories ranging from yogurt and cereal to candy, supplements, beverages, ice cream, bread, sauces and sweeteners.

The data layer should be the authoritative product list.

The editorial sections below explain the main patterns.

Major product groups represented in verified cases

Yogurt

Chobani Zero Sugar yogurt

The Chobani litigation is the category's central precedent because the Seventh Circuit decided Franco v. Chobani in July 2026.

The case concerns Zero Sugar yogurt containing allulose and a sugar-free labeling theory.

Energy and hydration products

Verified cases involve products sold under brands including:

• Liquid Death;
• Liquid I.V.;
• BODYARMOR;
• Kirkland Signature;
• Dunkin'.

These cases are not identical. Some challenge "Zero Sugar," some "0g Sugar," and some "Sugar Free" wording.

Protein and snack bars

The dataset includes litigation involving:

• DAVID Protein bars;
• KIND Zero Added Sugar bars.

The distinction in wording is important. "0g Sugar" and "ZEROg Added Sugar" should not be normalized into the same claim.

Cereals

Verified cases include Special K and Magic Spoon products.

The reported challenged wording includes combinations of:

• Zero Added Sugar;
• 0g Total Sugars;
• 0g Added Sugar;
• No Added Sugar.

That makes cereal litigation particularly useful for understanding why § 101.60(c)(1), § 101.60(c)(2) and Nutrition Facts rules should be analyzed separately.

Candy and gummies

The verified dataset includes products sold under brands such as:

• Joyride;
• Welch's;
• Goli;
• Grüns;
• Emergen-C;
• Hormbles Chormbles.

Some of those are conventional candy or fruit-snack products, while others are supplement gummies.

The legal theory still turns on the actual challenged sugar wording and the product facts, not simply the product category.

Bread and baked goods

Hero Bread litigation challenges reported "0G SUGAR" wording on allulose-containing baked goods.

Primary complaint material is available in the dataset for the flagship Hero matter.

Sauces and marinades

Multiple verified cases involve products sold under Ray's / Ken's Foods with "No Sugar Added" theories.

Those cases are especially useful examples of litigation involving added-sugar wording rather than the pure sugar-free language at issue in Franco.

Ice cream

The dataset includes cases involving Keto Foods and Nick's.

Again, "Zero Added Sugar" and "No Added Sugar" are not interchangeable with a "Zero Sugar" claim.

Syrups and sweeteners

Verified litigation includes Monin and Wholesome Yum product groups.

The project also separately tracks older adjacent allulose litigation that is not part of the current sugar-labeling wave. Those adjacent matters should not be mixed into the main verified case count.

Which brands have the most verified cases?

Several brands have more than one verified case.

The highest counts in the October 3 snapshot include:

• Welch's: 5;
• Liquid Death: 4;
• Ray's / Ken's Foods: 4;
• Grüns: 4;
• Chobani: 3;
• Liquid I.V.: 3;
• KIND: 3;
• DAVID Protein: 3;
• Trader Joe's: 3.

These numbers are not a ranking of wrongdoing.

They are simply the number of separately tracked verified or cross-checked dockets associated with each primary brand in the dataset.

Products named in a lawsuit versus products under investigation

This distinction is essential.

Named in a filed lawsuit

A complaint, court-derived docket record or sufficiently corroborated case record ties the product group to an actual lawsuit.

Publicly under investigation

A law firm or other source says it is reviewing the product or category, but we have not verified a filed case.

Contains allulose

The product contains allulose. No litigation implication should be inferred.

We keep those categories separate throughout this site.

A law-firm investigation page can be useful for discovering products and intake criteria. It is not primary proof that a lawsuit exists.

How do we verify a product?

For a product to move into the site's verified litigation directory, we want to establish as much of the following as possible:

1. case caption;
2. docket number;
3. federal court;
4. filing date;
5. defendant legal entity;
6. brand;
7. product group;
8. allulose relevance;
9. reported challenged wording;
10. supporting source trail.

Where a complaint is available, it should control product detail over secondary summaries.

Can the Nutrition Facts panel still show 0g sugar?

FDA's current allulose guidance allows manufacturers to exclude allulose from the amounts declared as Total Sugars and Added Sugars under enforcement discretion.

That is why an allulose-containing product can present a Nutrition Facts declaration that does not count allulose in those figures.

The litigation frequently concerns a different statement elsewhere on the package, or a numerical callout whose legal treatment is disputed.

A Nutrition Facts declaration should therefore not be treated as interchangeable with every front-label sugar claim.

Does every product containing allulose have a legal problem?

No.

The current litigation is not a lawsuit against the use of allulose itself.

A product can contain allulose without making the challenged type of sugar claim.

Even among products that do make such claims, litigation outcomes can differ based on:

• exact wording;
• amount and use of allulose;
• packaging context;
• governing regulation;
• jurisdiction;
• state law;
• preemption;
• reasonable-consumer analysis;
• procedural posture.

Recently verified examples

Our latest verification pass confirmed several matters that were previously incomplete or uncertain.

Dunkin'

We now track Wells v. Dunkin Brands Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14463 in the District of Massachusetts, filed September 30, 2026.

A court-feed-derived record establishes the case identity, and Law360 independently reports that the complaint challenges allulose in a zero-sugar energy drink.

Joyride

We added Edwards v. Project 7, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-10922 in the Northern District of Illinois, filed September 9, 2026.

A federal docket index establishes the case, and complaint-based reporting ties it to Joyride's allulose and zero-sugar labeling.

Magic Spoon

We added the N.D. Illinois matter Freifeld v. Magic Spoon, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-09944.

That case was later reported voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. A later New York Freifeld docket is still being researched until the complaint and its relationship to the allulose theory are directly established.

This is exactly why the site's product directory should distinguish verified case records from unresolved leads.

Frequently asked questions

What types of products containing allulose have been sued?

Verified cases span yogurt, beverages, hydration mixes, bars, cereal, candy, gummies, baked goods, sauces, ice cream, syrups, sweeteners and other product categories.

Does a product appearing here mean the lawsuit is proven?

No. It means the product group is tied to a tracked case record. Allegations remain allegations unless a court finds otherwise.

Does "0g Total Sugars" mean there is no allulose?

No. FDA currently permits allulose to be excluded from Total Sugars and Added Sugars declarations under enforcement discretion.

Are all products on the list part of the same lawsuit?

No. The directory covers many separate proposed class actions in different courts.

Will the product list change?

Yes.

Sources cited in this guide (4)

• FDA allulose guidance
• Franco v. Chobani, LLC
• Primary complaints for the Hero Bread, Special K, BODYARMOR and Goli matters, linked from each case page.
• The alluloselawsuit.com case tracker, with the sources cited on each case page.