According to the lawsuit, all twenty samples included chicken DNA, the majority (11 of 20) contained pork DNA, and some (seven of 20) contained cattle DNA. The filing continues to assert that tests conducted by researchers at UCLA’s (University of California, Los Angeles) Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology revealed that 19 of 20 tuna samples gathered from various Southern California Subway restaurants contained no detectable tuna DNA sequences. The plaintiffs’ second amended complaint, filed November 8, alleges that they relied on Subway’s allegedly false statements that its tuna products are “tuna” and “100% tuna.” Tigar’s October 7 order dismissing the lawsuit.Ĭlick to access Karen-Dhanowa-et-al.-v. Tuna Made with Chicken, Pork, and Cattle
The plaintiffs in the case have filed an amended complaint to address the concerns identified in United States District Judge Jon S. Consumer Class Actions Subway Tuna Class Action Lawsuit – Is There Actual Tuna In Subway’s Tuna Sandwich?īy Consider The Consumer on Amended Complaint Filed Over Subway “Real Tuna” Class Action Lawsuit
0 kommentar(er)
