Ultra Processed Food Lawsuit
Last updated: September 4, 2026
These are among the newest product cases in the country, and courts are still working out whether they hold up. The people suing say major manufacturers built packaged foods to be hard to stop eating, borrowed tactics from the tobacco industry, aimed the marketing at children, and never warned anyone about the health risks. The first test case was brought by a teenager named Bryce Martinez. A judge threw it out for a second time in June 2026, and that time for good. New cases have been filed since, and so has the first lawsuit by a city.
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 say manufacturers tuned the sugar, salt, fat, and additives in these foods to hit the brain’s reward system hard and to keep people eating past the point of feeling full. They say the companies aimed the marketing at children and kept what they knew about the health risks to themselves. Several complaints point straight at tobacco. Tobacco companies once owned major food brands, and the complaints say the same methods came across with them.
Two conditions sit at the center of these cases: type 2 diabetes that starts in childhood, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Complaints also raise obesity, heart problems, and other long-term conditions that the research has looked at.
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
Bryce Martinez was 16 when he was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. In December 2024 he sued in Philadelphia, saying the companies’ products caused both. Everyone watching treated his case as the test of whether tobacco-style claims could work against food companies.
In September 2025 the judge threw the case out. The complaint named more than a hundred brands, but it never said which products Martinez actually ate, how much of them, or when. It never tied a particular company to a particular act. The judge did not rule that these claims can never work. She ruled that this one was too vague to go forward.
He got a chance to fix it and came back with a complaint running about 500 pages. On June 30, 2026, Judge Mia Roberts Perez dismissed the case for good, which means it cannot be filed again in that court. The problem was the same one as before. Research linking these foods to disease in general does not show that these particular products from these particular companies made this particular young man sick.
That ruling is the biggest thing to happen in this litigation so far. It leaves the door open for these claims in general, and it leaves the city cases alone, since those run on different arguments. What it settles is the standard. A case that names a long list of companies has to connect specific products, actually eaten, to a specific illness. Without that, it gets thrown out.
The New Wave of Cases
New cases have been filed since, written with that ruling in mind. In January 2026, someone in Louisiana with the same two diagnoses sued a similar group of companies on the same engineered-addiction argument. More cases have been filed for children. In April 2026 a Wisconsin woman filed Kreie v. Kraft Heinz against the same core group plus Unilever, saying their products gave her type 2 diabetes. Firms taking these cases now build them around specific products and documented eating history.
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 city says the marketing was deceptive and that these products are a public nuisance, contributing to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. It wants money and changes to how the products are marketed.
A city suit runs on different arguments than a personal injury case. It still puts pressure on the same companies, and it often pries loose internal documents that individual plaintiffs use later.
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
These cases are still at the very beginning. The courts have not grouped them together, none has gone to trial, and no company has settled. The Martinez dismissal took away the case everyone was watching and raised the bar that every case filed since has to clear. The San Francisco case is working through its early stages, and it does not have to prove that the food made any one person sick. Meanwhile the research keeps coming, including a major Lancet review, and both sides will draw on it.
If you see a number quoted as a settlement amount for these cases, it is invented. No settlement exists. Whether this grows into a mass tort on the scale the plaintiffs expect is still an open question.
Why Product and Medical Records Matter
The Martinez ruling made the lesson plain. Detail is what decides these cases early on. That means which products were eaten regularly and over how long. It means grocery and purchase records. It means the diagnosis and treatment history, the pediatric records, and what the family ate.
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?
They say major food companies built these products to be hard to stop eating, tuning the sugar, salt, fat, and additives to do it. They say the marketing was aimed at children, and that nobody was warned about risks like type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. The companies deny all of it, and none of it has been proven in court.
Which companies are named in the ultra processed food lawsuits?
The list changes from case to case. It has included Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Nestle USA, General Mills, Kellogg, Mars, Post Holdings, and ConAgra. San Francisco named a similar group in December 2025.
What happened in the Martinez case?
Bryce Martinez was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease at 16, and in December 2024 he filed the first major case of this kind in Philadelphia. The judge threw it out in September 2025 because it never said which products he ate or how they caused his illness. He tried again with a complaint of about 500 pages. On June 30, 2026 the judge dismissed it for good, on the same ground. The rulings were about how the case was written, not about whether such claims can ever win.
Is there an ultra processed food class action?
Most of these are individual lawsuits, and the courts have not grouped them together. Separately, San Francisco filed the first city suit over these foods in December 2025, claiming deceptive marketing and public nuisance.
Has there been an ultra processed food lawsuit settlement?
No. No company has settled any of these cases, and there is no settlement program to apply to. The litigation is at the very beginning, and the case everyone treated as the test was dismissed for good in June 2026.
Who may qualify for an ultra processed food lawsuit?
Firms looking at these claims focus on people diagnosed with type 2 diabetes starting in childhood, or with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, after years of eating these foods. Since the Martinez ruling, being able to name the products and show the history matters more than ever. Whether any of that fits your situation depends on your facts.
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.
