McDonald’s McRib Putative Class Action, Judge Perry Denies Motion to Dismiss After October 30, 2026 Ruling

McDonald’s must face the McRib lawsuit. On October 30, 2026, U.S. District Judge April M. Perry in Chicago rejected McDonald’s request to dismiss the putative class action, which alleges that the sandwich’s name, rib-shaped patty and advertising mislead customers into believing it contains actual pork rib meat.

She dismissed some claims, but let the central allegations proceed. This is not a final judgment against McDonald’s, not a settlement, and not an order to refund anyone.

Bottom line: No class has been certified, no settlement exists, and there is no claim form or confirmed payout.

McDonald’s McRib Lawsuit: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Case name	Le et al. v. McDonald’s Corporation
Case number	1:25-cv-15609
Court	U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
Judge	April M. Perry
Filed	December 23, 2025
Defendant	McDonald’s Corporation
Named plaintiffs	Peter Le, Charles Lynch, Dorien Baker and Darrick Wilson
Core allegation	The McRib’s name, shape and ads mislead buyers into expecting pork rib meat
Original complaint	45 pages, 16 causes of action
Latest ruling	October 30, 2026: motion to dismiss denied in part, granted in part
Proposed nationwide class	U.S. residents who bought a McRib in the four years before filing
Proposed subclasses	California, New York, Illinois and Washington, D.C.
Class certified?	No
Settlement or claim form?	None. Official court record: Justia docket

What Did Judge Perry Decide in the McDonald’s McRib Case?

According to Reuters’ October 30, 2026 report, Judge Perry called it premature to accept McDonald’s argument that no reasonable consumer could expect the McRib to contain rib meat. She wrote that the plaintiffs’ understanding of “McRib” “is not unreasonable or fanciful.”

Three points stand out:

• Website not enough. McDonald’s website describes the sandwich as pork but names no cut. The judge reasoned that buyers of a roughly $7 fast-food sandwich should not have to research its ingredients first.
• Intent to defraud. She found that ads highlighting the patty’s rib-like shape could support a claim of intent to defraud, though more proof is needed.
• Partial win for McDonald’s. Some claims were dismissed. The reported summary does not list which ones, so this article does not guess. The written order on PACER controls.

A motion to dismiss tests whether the allegations are legally plausible. It does not decide who is telling the truth.

What Do the Plaintiffs Allege Is Inside the McRib?

The complaint alleges the patty is restructured pork made from other cuts, including pork shoulder, heart, tripe and scalded stomach, with no rib meat. They say customers overpaid for one of McDonald’s pricier items.

These are allegations, not court findings. The complaint cites USDA National Daily Pork Report figures from November 17, 2025: pork rib meat at $152.32 per 100 pounds, pork butt at $108.84, and pork loin at $85.90.

It also cites December 2024 pricing: an average McRib price of about $5.63 (up to $7.89 at some locations) against about $5.29 for a Big Mac. Two consumer surveys are cited as well: 155 of 215 respondents (about 72%) expected rib meat, and 118 of 174 (about 67%) said rib meat mattered to their purchase. These are the plaintiffs’ own studies, and McDonald’s can challenge their methods.

The case does not allege the McRib is unsafe. It is a deception case, not a food safety or injury case.

What Does McDonald’s Say Is in the McRib?

McDonald’s strongly denies the allegations. It says the McRib is made with 100% seasoned boneless pork from U.S. suppliers, served with barbecue sauce, onions and pickles on a toasted bun. It specifically denies using hearts, tripe or scalded stomach, and says the lawsuit “distorts the facts and many of the claims are inaccurate.”

Note the gap: “100% pork” does not say which cut of pork is used. The official description is on the McDonald’s McRib page.

Who Filed the McRib Lawsuit Against McDonald’s?

• Peter Le, Baldwin Park, California, who says he bought a McRib around November 15, 2024.
• Charles Lynch, Poughkeepsie, New York, who alleges multiple purchases including December 2024.
• Dorien Baker, Chicago, Illinois, who alleges several purchases in December 2024.
• Darrick Wilson, Washington, D.C., who says he bought a McRib around November 28, 2024.

Which Laws Apply in Le v. McDonald’s Corporation?

The original complaint pleaded 16 causes of action. The October 30 ruling dismissed some, so treat this list as what was pleaded, not what survives.

Law	Why it matters here
Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/2	Bars deceptive acts in trade or commerce. Basis for the Illinois claim.
New York General Business Law § 349	Bars deceptive business practices. Basis for the New York claim.
New York General Business Law § 350	Bars false advertising.
California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Civil Code § 1770	Lists unfair and deceptive consumer-transaction practices.
California False Advertising Law, Business and Professions Code § 17500	Bars untrue or misleading advertising.
California Unfair Competition Law, Business and Professions Code § 17200	Reaches unlawful, unfair or fraudulent practices.
District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act, D.C. Code § 28-3904	Bars unfair and deceptive trade practices. Basis for the D.C. claim.
Common-law fraud and negligent misrepresentation	Alleged misleading name and presentation, with required intent, reliance and harm.
Uniform Commercial Code § 2-313 and § 2-315	Express warranty and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
Breach of contract, good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment	Claims that buyers overpaid for what was represented.
28 U.S.C. § 1332(d) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23	The Class Action Fairness Act gives federal jurisdiction. Rule 23 governs whether a class can be certified.

Who Could Be Included in the McDonald’s McRib Class?

The proposed nationwide class covers U.S. residents who bought a McRib in the four years before filing, running until notice is sent to the class. Because the case was filed December 23, 2025, that period would begin December 23, 2021. The proposed state subclasses (California, New York, Illinois, Washington, D.C.) use a three-year period beginning December 23, 2022, and also require residency and purchase in that jurisdiction.

These definitions are proposed, not court-approved. One purchase could place someone in the proposed class, but that does not mean payment. The court must still certify a class under Rule 23.

Is There a McRib Settlement, Claim Form or Payout?

No. As of October 31, 2026 there is no settlement, settlement fund, claims administrator, claim form or deadline. The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, restitution, injunctive relief against the alleged deceptive naming and marketing, and attorneys’ fees and costs. No per-person amount has been set.

Be careful with websites that promise a McRib payout or ask for a registration fee. No legitimate claims process exists.

What Happens Next in the McRib Lawsuit?

1. Remaining claims: The parties continue on the claims that survived.
2. Discovery: Both sides exchange evidence, which could cover the actual pork cuts, supplier records, and marketing and consumer research.
3. Class certification: The court decides whether the plaintiffs meet Rule 23.
4. Damages: The plaintiffs must show a workable way to measure any loss.
5. Settlement or trial: Either remains possible. No trial date or settlement deadline has been verified.

Why the McRib Case Matters for Food Advertising Lawsuits

The case tests how far a company can rely on a product name and shape to signal what is inside. Companies need not list every manufacturing detail, but consumer protection laws can reach marketing that misleads reasonable buyers about a material feature.

Related coverage on AllAboutLawyer.com:

• McDonald’s AI Pricing Lawsuit, Customers Accuse McDonald’s of Algorithmic Price-Fixing
• Arby’s False Advertising Lawsuit, Did You Get Less Meat Than the Menu Showed?
• Subway Tuna Lawsuit Dismissed 2023, No Settlement or Claim Form Available

McDonald’s McRib Lawsuit: Frequently Asked Questions

Did McDonald’s lose the McRib lawsuit on October 30, 2026?

Not entirely. Judge April M. Perry denied McDonald’s request to dismiss the whole case but dismissed some claims. There is no final judgment against McDonald’s.

Does the McRib contain real rib meat, according to the court?

The court has not decided. The ruling only allows the plaintiffs’ deception allegations to continue. McDonald’s denies the plaintiffs’ ingredient claims.

Who are the plaintiffs in Le v. McDonald’s Corporation?

Peter Le (California), Charles Lynch (New York), Dorien Baker (Illinois) and Darrick Wilson (Washington, D.C.).

Can I file a claim for a McRib refund?

Not now. There is no settlement, claims administrator, claim form or deadline.

Who could qualify for the proposed McRib class?

U.S. residents who bought a McRib during the proposed four-year period, plus state subclasses in California, New York, Illinois and Washington, D.C. The court has not approved these definitions.

Is the McRib lawsuit about food safety?

No. It concerns what the name and marketing allegedly led customers to believe about the pork, not contamination or illness.

Must McDonald’s rename the McRib?

No. The plaintiffs ask for an injunction against the alleged deceptive naming and marketing, but no court has granted it.

When will the McRib lawsuit be resolved?

No settlement or trial date has been confirmed. The case remains in active litigation.

Sources and Court Documents

1. Reuters, McDonald’s must face lawsuit over McRib, U.S. judge rules, October 30, 2026
2. Original 45-page complaint, Le et al. v. McDonald’s Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-15609
3. U.S. District Court docket via Justia
4. McDonald’s official McRib product page
5. Axios, January 5, 2026
6. CBS News Chicago
7. USDA AMS National Daily Pork Report

Research note: The public docket copy reviewed did not include the October 30 written order, so this article does not state which individual claims were dismissed.

Disclaimer: General information only, not legal advice. All allegations against McDonald’s remain disputed unless established in court.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against Reuters’ October 30, 2026 report, the original complaint (Case No. 1:25-cv-15609) and the public court docket, as of October 31, 2026. Last Updated: October 31, 2026.