Ultra Processed Food Lawsuit
Last updated: August 7, 2026
Ultra processed food lawsuits are among the newest and most closely watched product cases in the country. Plaintiffs allege that major manufacturers engineered packaged foods to be habit-forming using tactics borrowed from the tobacco industry, marketed them to children, and failed to warn about links to conditions like childhood type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. The first test case, brought by Bryce Martinez, was dismissed for a second time in June 2026, this time with prejudice, but new individual cases and the first government lawsuit have followed.
This page is part of our broader coverage of Processed Food Addiction Lawsuits. Brand coverage is available at Kraft Heinz Lawsuit and Coca-Cola Lawsuit, and health background at Ultra Processed Food Health Effects.
This page provides general educational information about ultra processed food litigation. The claims described are allegations that the companies dispute, and nothing here has been proven in court. This page is not medical or legal advice.
What the Lawsuits Allege
The complaints allege that manufacturers designed ultra processed foods with specific combinations of sugar, salt, fats, and additives calibrated to overstimulate reward systems in the brain, suppress natural satiety, and promote compulsive eating, and that the companies marketed these products heavily to children while withholding what they knew about the health risks. Several complaints draw an explicit line to the tobacco industry, noting the history of tobacco companies owning major food manufacturers and alleging the same playbook was applied to food.
The health conditions at the center of the cases are childhood-onset type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, with complaints also referencing obesity, cardiovascular issues, and other chronic conditions discussed in the research literature.
The Companies Named
- Kraft Heinz
- Mondelez
- Coca-Cola
- PepsiCo
- Nestle USA
- General Mills
- Kellogg entities
- Mars
- Post Holdings
- ConAgra Brands
Defendant lists vary by complaint. Brand-level coverage is available at Kraft Heinz Lawsuit and Coca-Cola Lawsuit.
The Martinez Test Case and Its Final Dismissal
The first major case was filed in December 2024 in Philadelphia by Bryce Martinez, who was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease at age 16 and alleged the conditions resulted from consuming the defendants' products. The case was widely described as a test of whether tobacco-style claims could work against food manufacturers.
In September 2025, the court dismissed the case. The judge found the complaint listed more than one hundred brands but failed to identify the specific products Martinez consumed, in what quantities and when, did not adequately plead causation, and did not attribute specific conduct to specific defendants. The dismissal was a significant early defense win, but it turned on pleading specificity rather than a ruling that such claims can never succeed.
Martinez was given the chance to fix those defects and filed a proposed amended complaint running to roughly 500 pages. On June 30, 2026, U.S. District Judge Mia Roberts Perez of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied leave to amend and dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled in that court. The court concluded that the amended pleading still failed on the same ground as the first: general scientific research associating ultra processed food consumption with disease does not establish that particular products from particular manufacturers caused this plaintiff's conditions.
The ruling is the most consequential development in this litigation so far. It does not hold that ultra processed food injury claims are barred as a matter of law, and it does not touch the government cases, which proceed on different theories. What it does establish is that an industry-wide pleading, naming a long roster of manufacturers without tying specific products and consumption to a specific injury, will not survive a motion to dismiss in federal court.
The New Wave of Cases
New individual lawsuits have been filed since the dismissal, drafted with the Martinez ruling in mind. A January 2026 case filed in federal court in Louisiana by a plaintiff diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease repeats the engineered-addiction allegations against a similar defendant roster, and additional cases have been filed on behalf of minors. In April 2026, a Wisconsin plaintiff filed Kreie v. Kraft Heinz in federal court against the same core group of manufacturers plus Unilever, alleging that her consumption of their products caused type 2 diabetes. Plaintiffs' firms have signaled that identifying specific products and documented consumption is now central to how these cases are built.
The San Francisco Government Lawsuit
In December 2025, the City of San Francisco filed the first government lawsuit in the country over ultra processed foods, naming Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Nestle USA, General Mills, Kellogg, Post Holdings, Mars, and ConAgra. The suit alleges deceptive marketing and public nuisance tied to products the city argues contribute to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer, and it seeks damages and changes to marketing practices.
Government suits proceed on different legal theories than individual injury cases, but they add regulatory-style pressure to the same industry and often surface internal documents that individual plaintiffs later use.
Were you or your child diagnosed with type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease after years of heavy ultra processed food consumption? You may qualify for a free case review.
Check My EligibilityWhere the Litigation Stands in 2026
As of August 2026, the individual injury cases remain in their earliest stages, with no coordinated proceeding, no MDL, no trial, and no settlement of any kind. The June 2026 dismissal of Martinez with prejudice removed the case that had been treated as the bellwether for the whole theory, and it raised the pleading bar that every case filed after it has to clear. The San Francisco case is moving through its opening phases on public nuisance and deceptive marketing theories that do not require proof of individual causation, and research developments, including a major Lancet review of ultra processed food harms and the dietary guidelines discussion of these foods, continue to shape the public record both sides will draw on.
Anyone suggesting settlement amounts for these cases is ahead of the facts. No settlement exists, and whether this litigation matures into a mass tort on the scale plaintiffs predict remains an open question.
Why Product and Medical Records Matter
The Martinez dismissal made one thing clear: specificity wins or loses these cases at the pleading stage. Potentially relevant records include which specific products were consumed regularly and over what period, grocery and purchase records, the diagnosis and treatment history for conditions like type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, pediatric records, and family dietary history.
For a broader look at how evidence works in cases like these, see What Evidence Helps a Lawsuit? and How Lawsuits Work.
Related Lawsuit Topics
Processed Food Addiction Lawsuits
Start with the overview of addiction-by-design legal theories involving food products.
Kraft Heinz Lawsuit
The ultra processed food claims against Kraft Heinz, plus the Velveeta class action people remember.
Coca-Cola Lawsuit
Where Coca-Cola fits in the ultra processed food litigation and its other consumer cases.
Ultra Processed Food Health Effects
What the research discusses about ultra processed foods, addiction-like eating, and chronic disease.
Video Game Addiction Lawsuits
Compare the parallel addiction-by-design litigation involving games and minors.
Social Media Addiction Lawsuit
Compare the coordinated litigation involving platforms and adolescent mental health.
Frequently Asked Questions About the Ultra Processed Food Lawsuit
What is the ultra processed food lawsuit about?
These lawsuits allege that major food manufacturers deliberately engineered ultra processed foods to be habit-forming, using combinations of sugar, salt, fats, and additives, marketed them heavily to children, and failed to warn about health risks such as type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. The companies dispute these allegations, and the claims have not been proven in court.
Which companies are named in the ultra processed food lawsuits?
Defendant lists vary by case but have included Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Nestle USA, General Mills, Kellogg entities, Mars, Post Holdings, and ConAgra. The San Francisco government suit filed in December 2025 named a similar roster.
What happened in the Martinez case?
Bryce Martinez filed the first major ultra processed food injury case in December 2024 in Philadelphia after being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease at 16. The court dismissed it in September 2025 for failing to identify the specific products he consumed or adequately plead causation, then on June 30, 2026 denied leave to amend and dismissed the case with prejudice, finding that the roughly 500-page amended complaint had the same defect. The rulings turned on pleading specificity rather than a holding that such claims can never succeed.
Is there an ultra processed food class action?
Most of the injury cases are individual lawsuits rather than class actions, and no MDL or coordinated proceeding has been created for them. Separately, the City of San Francisco filed the first government suit over ultra processed foods in December 2025, alleging deceptive marketing and public nuisance.
Has there been an ultra processed food lawsuit settlement?
No. As of August 2026, no settlement has been announced in any of the ultra processed food injury cases, and no settlement program exists. The litigation is in its earliest stages, and the case that was treated as its test vehicle was dismissed with prejudice in June 2026.
Who may qualify for an ultra processed food lawsuit?
Firms evaluating these claims generally focus on people diagnosed with conditions such as childhood-onset type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease following heavy, documented consumption of ultra processed foods. After the Martinez dismissal, the ability to identify specific products and consumption history matters even more.
Find Out If You May Have a Case
If you or your child were diagnosed with childhood-onset type 2 diabetes or non-alcoholic fatty liver disease after years of heavy ultra processed food consumption, you can request a free, no-obligation case review on Lawsuit Center.
Educational purposes only. Submitting a case review request does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Related Legal Guides
How Lawsuits Work
Get a simple overview of how legal claims are investigated, filed, and resolved over time.
Mass Torts
Understand how coordinated proceedings work when many similar claims move through court together.
Class Actions
Learn how class actions differ from individual injury claims and coordinated mass torts.
What Evidence Helps a Lawsuit?
See which records, documents, and history can support an injury or product claim.
How Long Do Lawsuits Take?
Learn what can affect the timeline of a lawsuit and why some claims take longer than others.
