David Protein Bar Class Action Lawsuit 2026, What Consumers Need to Know

On January 23, 2026, a consumer filed a federal class action lawsuit against Linus Technologies, Inc. — the company behind David Protein bars — in a New York federal court. The lawsuit alleges the bars contain up to 83% more calories and 400% more fat than the label states. Lab tests back the claim. The company denies it. No settlement exists. Nothing to file yet.

Quick Facts

What Actually Happened?

A Lawsuit That Caught the Fitness World Off Guard

David Protein bars became one of the fastest-growing products in the fitness food space. The bars marketed a near-impossible combination: 28 grams of protein and just 150 calories per bar. Health-conscious consumers, calorie trackers, and gym-goers snapped them up at a premium price.

Then came the lawsuit.

Lead plaintiff Daniella Lopez filed a class action complaint against Linus Technologies, Inc., doing business as David Protein, on January 23 in New York federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws. The 46-page complaint does not rely on guesswork — it includes actual lab results.

What Do the Lab Tests Show?

The complaint includes test results from an accredited laboratory that found the bars contained between 268 and 275 calories per serving — over 100 calories more than the company states — and between 11 and 13.5 grams of fat per serving, a vast difference from the 2 grams advertised.

To put that in plain terms: someone eating one David Protein bar while tracking a strict 1,500-calorie diet may have unknowingly consumed the calorie equivalent of a full meal — not a snack.

The suit argues that David Protein advertised and prominently displayed “demonstrably false” claims about the number of calories and total fat content of its bars to entice consumers to pay a premium compared to products not bearing the same claims.

Which Products Does the Lawsuit Cover?

The products at issue include David Protein’s Chocolate Chip Cookie, Cinnamon Roll, Fudge Brownie, Red Velvet, Peanut Butter Chocolate Chunk, Blueberry Pie, Pumpkin Spice, and Cake Batter protein bars.

If you bought any of these flavors — especially in California, Illinois, or New York — this lawsuit directly concerns you.

What Laws Did David Protein Allegedly Break?

The complaint cites multiple legal violations at both the federal and state level.

On the federal side, the lawsuit argues this misrepresentation violates FDA regulations requiring that the nutrient content of food products not exceed the declared value by more than 20%. The alleged gap here is not 20% — it is more than 80% on calories alone.

At the state level, the lawsuit names violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, New York General Business Law, California’s Unfair Competition Law, and California’s False Advertising Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act.

Many Americans are health conscious and routinely rely on a food product’s nutrition facts panel when determining which items to purchase. Conscientious consumers on diet plans measure and try to limit the number of calories and total amount of fat they consume. The lawsuit argues David Protein exploited that trust.

What Is the EPG Argument — and Why Does It Matter?

Here is where the case gets more technical, and where the company pushes back.

David Protein bars use EPG — esterified propoxylated glycerol — a patented fat substitute that the company says the body cannot fully digest. Because of that limited digestibility, David Protein argues the FDA allows EPG’s calorie contribution to be calculated differently than standard fat.

David Protein founder Peter Rahal maintained that the products were accurately labeled, stating that “this particular claim, among other things, fails to understand how the FDA measures the calories for EPG, one of our key ingredients.”

The plaintiffs disagree. They argue their lab tests used FDA-approved methods and that the results speak for themselves. The court has not yet ruled on who is right.

Related article: Binance vs The Wall Street Journal Lawsuit, The Full Story Behind the Defamation Dispute

Who Is Suing David Protein?

The plaintiffs’ legal team includes two law firms: Sultzer & Lipari PLLC and Bryson Harris Suciu & Demay PLLC. The lawsuit seeks to represent a broad class of U.S. consumers — not just one person.

The lawsuit seeks to represent anyone who purchased the misbranded protein bars in the United States, California, Illinois, and New York. The plaintiffs are demanding a jury trial and are asking for damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to prevent David Protein from continuing to sell misbranded products.

Injunctive relief, in plain English, means the plaintiffs want a court order forcing David Protein to change its labels — or stop selling the bars entirely until it does.

What Happens Next?

The case is at the very beginning. Here is where things stand and what to watch for:

• David Protein files its answer — The company must formally respond to the complaint in court. As of early March 2026, no answer had been filed.
• Discovery begins — Both sides will exchange evidence, including internal company communications, the methodology behind the nutrition labels, and the plaintiffs’ lab testing data.
• Class certification — A judge must decide whether this case can officially proceed as a class action representing all purchasers, not just the named plaintiff.
• Settlement or trial — Cases like this typically settle before trial. If a settlement is reached, a claim process will open for consumers. That has not happened yet.

This case also sits alongside a separate antitrust lawsuit filed in mid-2025, in which competing food companies accused David Protein of monopolizing the EPG supply chain by acquiring Epogee — the sole manufacturer of the ingredient. A judge denied the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction in that case, but the litigation continues.

What Should You Do Right Now?

You do not need to take any legal action at this stage. However, if you purchased David Protein bars and want to protect your ability to potentially participate in a future settlement, do this one thing: save your purchase records. That means receipts, Amazon order history, credit card statements, or any subscription confirmations showing you bought the product.

This case falls into a broader pattern of false advertising litigation targeting the fitness food industry. For context on how similar cases have played out, see our coverage of the Balance of Nature false advertising class action settlement, where consumers who purchased mislabeled supplement products ultimately shared in a multi-million dollar fund.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the David Protein lawsuit real? 

Yes. Lead plaintiff Daniella Lopez filed the case on January 23, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case number is 1:26-cv-635. It names Linus Technologies, Inc. as the defendant and includes lab test results from an accredited facility.

Can I file a claim against David Protein right now?

 No. No settlement has been reached and no claim form exists. The lawsuit was filed in January 2026 and is still at the earliest litigation stage. If a settlement is eventually reached, a claims process will open and this page will be updated.

Why does David Protein say its calorie count is accurate?

 The company argues that EPG — a patented fat substitute in the bars — is mostly indigestible, which it says allows the calorie count to be calculated at a lower figure under FDA rules. Plaintiffs counter that FDA-approved lab testing shows the bars contain significantly more usable calories than labeled. A court has not yet ruled on this.

Do I need a lawyer to participate in this case?

 No. If a settlement is reached, class members typically file claims directly through an online portal at no cost. The plaintiffs’ attorneys handle the litigation and take their fees from any settlement fund. You only need your own attorney if you plan to file a separate individual lawsuit.

Which David Protein bar flavors are named in the lawsuit?

 The complaint covers Chocolate Chip Cookie, Cinnamon Roll, Fudge Brownie, Red Velvet, Peanut Butter Chocolate Chunk, Blueberry Pie, Pumpkin Spice, and Cake Batter.

When will I receive a payment?

 There is no payment timeline. No settlement exists. False advertising food cases of this type typically take one to three years to resolve, depending on whether the parties reach a settlement or proceed to trial.

What if I missed the claim deadline?

 No claim deadline exists yet. There is nothing to miss at this stage. Check back here for updates as the case progresses.

Will a future settlement payment affect my taxes? 

Possibly. The IRS generally treats settlement payments as taxable income when they compensate for economic losses — such as overpaying for a mislabeled product — rather than physical injury. Consult a tax professional once any payment is issued.

Sources & References

• U.S. District Court, SDNY — PACER Docket (1:26-cv-635)

Last Updated: March 12, 2026

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Legal claims and outcomes depend on specific facts and applicable law. For advice regarding a 

About the Author

Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah