The Farmer’s Dog Lawsuit, Class Action Over Fat Content, Pancreatitis Claims and Marketing (2026 Update)

The Farmer’s Dog, the fresh dog-food subscription company, is facing a proposed federal class action. It alleges that the company’s recipes contain high levels of fat and that its marketing does not adequately explain the potential health implications.

The case is Trott v. The Farmer’s Dog, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03410, filed April 24, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York before Judge Edgardo Ramos.

Two points are often missed in summaries:

• The complaint does not allege that the plaintiff’s dog developed pancreatitis. Her two-year-old Labrador, Mya, reportedly refused to eat the food. The case is about how the food was marketed and what consumers allegedly were not told, not a diagnosed injury.
• No court has ruled on the merits. No class has been certified, and the company strongly denies the allegations.

The company has also asked the court to send the dispute to individual arbitration instead of a class action. That request is the main thing to watch. No settlement, payout or claim form exists.

The Farmer’s Dog Lawsuit: Quick Facts

Detail	Information
Case name	Trott v. The Farmer’s Dog, Inc.
Case number	1:26-cv-03410
Court	U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Judge	Edgardo Ramos
Plaintiff	Amy Trott, New Hampshire
Defendant	The Farmer’s Dog, Inc.
Filed	April 24, 2026
Proposed class	Nationwide U.S. purchasers, plus a New Hampshire subclass
Recipes at issue	Turkey, Beef, Chicken and Pork
Claims	Breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, fraud, New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act
Relief sought	Damages, restitution, injunctive relief, attorney fees
Company response	June 9, 2026 public statement calling the suit “baseless”
Motion to compel arbitration	Filed July 23, 2026; briefing completed by late August 2026
Class certified?	No
Settlement or claim form	None. No settlement website or claim form exists
Recall	No recall publicly reported as of October 31, 2026
Status	Pending; no reported ruling on arbitration

1. Who Filed the Lawsuit and What Happened

Amy Trott, a New Hampshire resident, says she saw Facebook ads describing The Farmer’s Dog meals as healthy and nutritious. In June 2025, she bought a 14-day supply for $27.26 and received chicken-and-grain, beef and turkey recipes for her two-year-old Labrador.

Her dog refused to eat the food, and the company issued a partial $9 refund. She says she would not have bought the food, or would have paid less, had she known the fat content and potential risks she now alleges.

She seeks to represent a nationwide class of U.S. buyers and a New Hampshire subclass. The complaint says the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million. That is a federal jurisdictional threshold for class actions, not a claimed damages figure.

2. What the Lawsuit Alleges

The complaint centers on four recipes: Turkey, Beef, Chicken and Pork.

The label versus dry-matter argument. Labels and marketing show fat as an “as-fed” percentage, roughly 4.5% to 8%. Because fresh food is mostly water, the plaintiff recalculates fat on a dry-matter basis, with moisture removed:

Recipe	Alleged fat, dry-matter basis
Turkey	About 18.75%
Chicken	About 25%
Pork	About 26%
Beef	About 28.57%

She alleges that three of the four recipes are at or above roughly 25% fat on a dry-matter basis, derive more than 40% of calories from fat, and contain more than 45 grams of fat per 1,000 kilocalories. The complaint calls those levels far out of line with typical recommendations for most dogs.

Alleged health risks. The complaint says high-fat diets can predispose dogs, especially sedentary ones, to obesity, hypertension and pancreatitis.

Alleged marketing failures. It claims the company adds fat to make food more palatable and calorie-dense while keeping ingredient costs down, and that full nutritional details and risk warnings are buried or not clearly disclosed during online ordering. It also challenges the company’s “complete,” “balanced” and personalized-nutrition messaging.

These are the plaintiff’s allegations and calculations, not findings by a court.

3. As-Fed vs. Dry-Matter: Why the Numbers Look So Different

Pet-food labels list percentages as fed, including water. Dry-matter figures remove the water so foods with different moisture levels can be compared fairly.

The conversion is: as-fed percentage ÷ (100 minus moisture percentage) × 100. As a hypothetical example, a food with 5% fat as fed and 75% moisture has 5 ÷ 0.25 = 20% fat on a dry-matter basis.

This is why a fresh food with a modest-looking label percentage can show a much higher dry-matter figure. Both views are used in pet nutrition, and neither is a secret. The dispute is about what the company told consumers, how clearly, and whether those fat levels are appropriate and safe.

4. The Farmer’s Dog’s Response

In a June 9, 2026 public statement, the company called the lawsuit baseless and said it contradicts established pet-food regulation and veterinary nutrition science. It makes these points:

• Every recipe is formulated and tested by on-staff board-certified veterinary nutritionists to be complete and balanced.
• Fat levels fall within AAFCO (Association of American Feed Control Officials) and National Research Council standards used industry-wide.
• Fat is an essential nutrient with required minimums, and the company’s ranges are safe and comparable to or lower than many other popular veterinary-recommended brands.
• Pancreatitis is common, often idiopathic (no known cause), and influenced by genetics and other factors. No diet fully prevents it.
• Its feeding trials, long-term research and data from millions of dogs show no elevated pancreatitis rates, and blood markers such as lipase and triglycerides were normal in AAFCO trials.

The company has not been found liable for anything.

5. The Legal Claims in Plain English

• Breach of express warranty: The company allegedly made specific promises, such as healthy, balanced and nutritionally complete, that the product did not meet.
• Breach of implied warranty: The product was allegedly not fit for its ordinary purpose as everyday dog food.
• Fraud: The company allegedly made misleading statements or concealed important information on purpose.
• New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act: The marketing was allegedly unfair or deceptive under state consumer law.

Each claim requires proof. A court will look at what was actually promised, what a reasonable consumer would understand, and whether the plaintiff was harmed.

6. The Arbitration Fight: Why It Matters Most Right Now

On July 23, 2026, The Farmer’s Dog moved to compel arbitration. It argues that Trott agreed to terms of use requiring individual arbitration instead of a class action in court. Briefing was complete by late August 2026, and the company’s deadline to answer the complaint is paused until the court rules.

This matters because consumer terms with arbitration clauses and class waivers are often enforced under the Federal Arbitration Act. If the judge sides with the company, the plaintiff’s claims could move to private individual arbitration, and the class action would likely end in this court. If the judge denies the motion, the case can continue toward a decision on whether to certify a class.

The outcome depends on whether the plaintiff actually agreed to the terms, whether the clause covers these claims, and whether it is enforceable. As of October 31, 2026, no ruling had been reported, and no discovery schedule, class certification hearing or settlement talks had been publicly reported.

7. Does This Lawsuit Prove the Food Causes Pancreatitis?

No. The lawsuit does not establish that The Farmer’s Dog caused pancreatitis in any dog, and the named plaintiff does not allege her dog was diagnosed with it. Pancreatitis in dogs can have many contributing factors, and diet is only one. The company’s position is that its recipes are safe and appropriate.

The legal question is narrower: were consumers misled about the nutritional profile and suitability of the food? That can be argued even if no dog was injured, which is why a case like this can proceed on marketing claims.

8. Other Legal Matters Involving the Company

The Farmer’s Dog has also been involved in separate lawsuits where it is the plaintiff, including a trade-secrets case and a defamation-related action. Those are unrelated to this consumer class action over fat content and marketing.

9. What Dog Owners Should Know

• An allegation in a lawsuit is not a proven fact, and no court has made findings of wrongdoing.
• No recall of The Farmer’s Dog products had been publicly reported as of October 31, 2026.
• If your dog has had pancreatitis, is overweight, or has been prescribed a low-fat diet, talk to your veterinarian before feeding any fresh or high-fat food, and ask for the full guaranteed analysis and dry-matter nutrient profile.
• AAFCO nutrient profiles set minimum fat levels for dogs, but they do not set a maximum for adult maintenance foods, so “meets AAFCO standards” does not by itself answer whether a fat level suits an individual dog.
• Watch for signs that warrant a vet visit: repeated vomiting, abdominal pain, loss of appetite, lethargy or diarrhea.

10. Can You Join the Lawsuit or Claim Money?

Not at this time. There is no settlement, no settlement website and no claim form. A class has not been certified. If a settlement is ever approved, official notice would be sent and a claim process would open. Until then, anyone offering to enroll you in a payout is not offering a court-approved claim.

If you bought the food and have concerns, you can contact the company about refunds under its own policies and speak with a veterinarian about your dog’s diet. For legal questions about your own rights, consult a consumer-protection attorney.

11. What Happens Next?

1. Ruling on arbitration. This is the key near-term event and could determine whether the class action survives in court.
2. Answer to the complaint. The deadline is paused until the arbitration motion is decided.
3. Class certification. This arises only if the case stays in court, and the plaintiff must show the class meets the legal requirements.
4. Merits evidence. Disputes over labeling, nutrition standards, causation and consumer expectations would likely involve expert testimony.

Timeline

Date	Development
June 2025	Plaintiff buys a 14-day supply for $27.26; later receives a partial $9 refund
April 24, 2026	Complaint filed in the Southern District of New York
June 9, 2026	Company publicly calls the lawsuit baseless
July 23, 2026	Company moves to compel individual arbitration
Late August 2026	Briefing on the motion completed
October 31, 2026	No ruling on arbitration and no class certification reported

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Farmer’s Dog lawsuit about?

A proposed class action alleging the company’s recipes contain high fat levels and that its marketing does not adequately explain the potential health risks.

Who filed it?

Amy Trott of New Hampshire, on April 24, 2026.

What is the case number?

Trott v. The Farmer’s Dog, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03410, Southern District of New York.

Did the plaintiff’s dog get sick?

The complaint does not allege that her dog developed pancreatitis or a diagnosed injury. Her dog reportedly refused to eat the food.

Which recipes are challenged?

Turkey, Beef, Chicken and Pork.

Is there a Farmer’s Dog settlement?

No. As of October 31, 2026, there is no settlement, settlement website or claim form.

Is there a Farmer’s Dog recall?

No recall had been publicly reported as of October 31, 2026.

What does the company say?

It calls the suit baseless, says its recipes are formulated by board-certified veterinary nutritionists and meet AAFCO and NRC standards, and says its research shows no elevated pancreatitis rates.

What is the arbitration motion?

The company argues the plaintiff agreed to terms requiring individual arbitration instead of a class action. The court has not been reported to have ruled.

Has a class been certified?

No.

Does the lawsuit prove the food causes pancreatitis?

No. These are unproven allegations, and the company disputes them.

What is a dry-matter basis?

A way of expressing nutrient levels with water removed, so foods with different moisture content can be compared.

Should I stop feeding my dog this food?

That is a question for your veterinarian, especially if your dog has a history of pancreatitis, is overweight or is on a prescribed diet.

Can I join the class action?

No claim process exists. If a class is certified or a settlement is approved, official notice would explain your options.

Sources and Legal References

Court and case records

1. Complaint, Trott v. The Farmer’s Dog, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03410 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 24, 2026), via ClassAction.org
2. Federal court docket, Trott v. The Farmer’s Dog, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03410 (S.D.N.Y.), including the July 23, 2026 motion to compel arbitration and briefing

Company statement and nutrition standards

3. The Farmer’s Dog, public statement responding to the lawsuit (June 9, 2026)
4. Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), dog food nutrient profiles
5. National Research Council, Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats

Legal analysis and news coverage

6. Packaging Digest / Alston & Bird, Dog Food Lawsuit Picks a Bone with Brand’s Nutrition Claims (July 30, 2026)
7. ClassAction.org, coverage of the Farmer’s Dog lawsuit
8. Petful, coverage of the Farmer’s Dog lawsuit and canine pancreatitis

About the Author

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher covering consumer class actions, product-labeling disputes, federal court proceedings and major legal developments.

This article is based on the filed complaint, public docket information, the company’s public statement, published legal analysis and news reporting. The plaintiff’s allegations and calculations have not been proven in court, and the company denies them. No court has ruled on the merits as of October 31, 2026.

Disclaimer: AllAboutLawyer.com is an independent legal information website, not a law firm. This article is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice or veterinary advice. Consult a licensed veterinarian about your dog’s diet and health.

Last Updated: October 31, 2026