Brand coverage · Last reviewed
Wholesome Yum allulose lawsuits
The short answer
- Two verified proposed class actions challenge “Zero Sugar” claims on Wholesome Yum zero-sugar syrups, honeys and sweeteners.
- Rule in play: 21 C.F.R. § 101.60(c)(1) (the sugar-free rule, which Franco addressed).
- Franco v. Chobani is binding in one of these cases (Seventh Circuit) and persuasive authority in the other.
- No liability finding, class certification or court-approved settlement has been identified in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
Wholesome Yum at a glance
- Verified cases
- 2
- Federal districts
- 2
- Circuits
- 2
- Classes certified*
- None identified
- Settlements*
- None identified
Latest filing September 14, 2026. * In the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026; not a complete same-day docket review. Settlement status explained
This page is built from the structured case record. A full editorial guide to the Wholesome Yum cases has not been published yet. Allegations are not findings of fact.
On this page
The Wholesome Yum cases we track
Filed after Franco
Verified Wholesome Yum cases by filing date, July 27, 2026 to October 3, 2026. All two filed within 7 weeks of the ruling.
- Jul 27, 2026Franco v. Chobani: the Seventh Circuit reverses the dismissal
- Sep 13, 2026 · C.D. Cal.Hock et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC
- Sep 14, 2026 · N.D. Ill.Tlaib et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC
2 cases, newest filing first
| Filed | Case | Wording challenged | Court | Franco is | Latest supported status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tlaib et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLCNo. 1:26-cv-11185 | “Zero Sugar” | N.D. Ill. | Binding | Reported pending | |
| Hock et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLCNo. 5:26-cv-05309 | “Zero Sugar” | C.D. Cal. | Persuasive | Reported pending |
No cases match these filters. If you bought a product that isn’t here, you can still share your purchase.
Open the Wholesome Yum cases in the case tracker
Records reviewed through October 3, 2026. Verified totals include only supported core labeling cases. Sources and methodology.
The rule in play
The federal rule treats “sugar free” and “no added sugar” claims under separate subsections. Claim families below come from our case record; they group reported allegations.
21 C.F.R. § 101.60(c)(1)
Zero Sugar
Addressed in Franco: The sugar-free rule, § 101.60(c)(1), which Franco v. Chobani addressed.
Franco v. Chobani held that allulose falls within the federal definition of sugar for the regulation it interpreted. It did not decide liability, and its binding effect is limited to the Seventh Circuit.
Wholesome Yum: product groups
Wholesome Yum zero-sugar syrups, honeys and sweeteners
“Zero Sugar”
Product groups summarize allegations in the reviewed cases. A listed product does not establish class membership, payment eligibility, or that every flavor or variant is challenged.
Sources for this module
- Wholesome Yum Zero Sugar Claims (Secondary source)
- Tlaib v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC (Court-derived docket index)
- Dominique Hock v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC (Court-derived docket index)
Wholesome Yum: status in reviewed records
Tlaib et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC
Pending, as reported by a secondary tracker
Recent secondary tracker report. Checked October 3, 2026. A current secondary tracker reports the case pending. This is not a substitute for a complete same-day PACER docket.
Hock et al. v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLC
Pending, as reported by a secondary tracker
Recent secondary tracker report. Checked October 3, 2026. A current secondary tracker reports the case pending. This is not a substitute for a complete same-day PACER docket.
Public docket indexes and secondary tracker reports do not establish the contents of the complete current court docket.
Sources for this module
- Wholesome Yum Zero Sugar Claims (Secondary source)
Settlement and claims-process review
No verified court-approved settlement identified in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
No verified class certification identified in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
No verified court-approved claim form identified in the records reviewed as of October 3, 2026.
The reviewed sources do not represent a complete same-day PACER review of every docket. A proposed class is not a certified class, and dismissal alone does not establish a settlement.
Background reading
Source record
Primary and court-derived sources are listed first. Secondary reporting is used for discovery and cross-checking.
Show all 3 sources
- Tlaib v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLCCourt-derived docket index · Justia Dockets · Sep 14, 2026 · Reviewed Oct 3, 2026
- Dominique Hock v. Wholesome Yum Brands, LLCCourt-derived docket index · Justia Dockets · Sep 13, 2026 · Reviewed Oct 3, 2026
- Wholesome Yum Zero Sugar ClaimsSecondary source · Truth in Advertising · Reviewed Oct 3, 2026