If you have seen "David protein bar lawsuit" trending, you may have seen two very different stories mixed together. There were actually two separate lawsuits. One claimed the bars have far more calories and fat than the label says. The other is an antitrust fight over the fat substitute that makes David's numbers possible.
Here is what each case alleged, how each one has played out so far, and what it means if you eat David bars. Short version: the calorie lawsuit was dropped by the people who filed it, and no court has ruled that David's labels are wrong. But no court has ruled they are right, either.
This article summarizes published reporting and court filings. It is not legal advice.
| Calorie class action | Antitrust case | |
|---|---|---|
| Case | Lopez et al. v. Linus Technologies, Inc. (1:26-cv-635) | OWN Your Hunger et al. v. Linus Technology, Epogee, and Peter Rahal (1:25-cv-04544) |
| Type | Consumer class action | Antitrust (competition) suit |
| Filed by | Three consumers: Daniella Lopez, David Freifeld, Crystal Paterson | Three food brands: OWN Your Hunger, Lighten Up Foods, Defiant Foods |
| Filed | January 2026 | June 2, 2025, Southern District of New York |
| Main allegation | Bars contain up to 83% more calories and up to 400% more fat than labeled | David bought Epogee, the EPG supplier, to cut competitors off from the ingredient |
| Status | Voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs, March 30, 2026 | Second Amended Complaint dismissed Feb 4, 2026; judge allowed a third amended complaint; case still open on the docket as of September 2026 |
| Did a court rule labels were wrong? | No | Not about labels |
David's pitch is 28 grams of protein in 150 calories with 0 grams of sugar. A big part of how it hits those numbers is EPG, short for esterified propoxylated glycerol, a modified plant-based fat. Ordinary fat provides about 9 calories per gram. EPG is designed to be only partly digested and is described as providing about 0.7 calories per gram. That is the heart of both lawsuits: the calorie case questioned whether the labeled calories are accurate, and the antitrust case is about who gets access to EPG at all. We cover the ingredient and how it affects digestion in our full David protein bar review.
In January 2026, three consumers filed a proposed class action, Lopez et al. v. Linus Technologies, Inc., d/b/a David Protein. According to the complaint, an FDA-recognized, accredited lab (Anresco Laboratories) tested the bars for calories and fat. The plaintiffs alleged the results showed up to 83% more calories and up to 400% more fat than the nutrition label states. News outlets often rounded this to "80% more calories."
The claim spread quickly on social media, where people compared it to the "Mean Girls" plot about a supposedly healthy diet bar, as NBC News noted.
On March 12, 2026, founder Peter Rahal sent a letter to customers and partners defending the labels. As reported by Inc., he argued that the lawsuit relied on bomb calorimetry, a lab method that measures the heat released when food is burned. "Your body doesn't burn food, it digests it," he wrote. His point: a method that burns EPG completely will count calories your body does not actually absorb, because EPG is built to pass through largely undigested.
On March 30, 2026, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the case, a little over two months after filing, as reported by NBC News, USA Today, and Inc. A voluntary dismissal means the plaintiffs withdrew. It is not a court ruling on whether the testing or the labels were right.
In May 2025, David acquired Epogee, the company that makes EPG. On June 2, 2025, three smaller brands that used EPG in their own low-calorie foods, OWN Your Hunger, Lighten Up Foods, and Defiant Foods, sued David, Epogee, and Peter Rahal in federal court in New York. According to Food Business News and AgFunderNews, they alleged David orchestrated the acquisition to cut competitors off from EPG and create a monopoly, in violation of federal antitrust law and New York's Donnelly Act.
David denied hoarding the ingredient. As AgFunderNews reported, the company argued that the plaintiffs' supply problems came from their own failure to sign long-term supply agreements, calling it "bad business planning."
On February 4, 2026, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero granted David's motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint and rejected their request for an injunction that would have required continued EPG supply. Bloomberg Law reported the court found the plaintiffs failed to properly define the relevant market.
That was not the end, though. The judge later gave the plaintiffs leave to file a third amended complaint to address those deficiencies, according to AgFunderNews. In June 2026, Lighten Up Foods dropped its claims by stipulation. As of late September 2026, the case was still open on the federal docket, so check current court records for the latest status.
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| Sept 16, 2024 | David launches: 28g protein, 150 calories, 0g sugar, $39 per 12-pack |
| May 2025 | David acquires Epogee, maker of the EPG fat substitute |
| June 2, 2025 | Three smaller food brands file an antitrust suit in federal court in New York |
| June 2025 | Plaintiffs amend their complaint after an early setback in court. David says the plaintiffs' problem was failing to sign long-term supply agreements |
| January 2026 | Consumer class action alleges undercounted calories and fat |
| Feb 4, 2026 | Judge Victor Marrero grants David's motion to dismiss the antitrust Second Amended Complaint and rejects the plaintiffs' request for an injunction |
| March 12, 2026 | Founder Peter Rahal sends a letter to customers and partners defending the labels |
| March 2026 | Judge allows antitrust plaintiffs to file a third amended complaint, focused on how they define the market |
| March 30, 2026 | Class action plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss their case |
| June 15, 2026 | Lighten Up Foods drops its claims in the antitrust case by stipulation |
This is where most coverage gets sloppy, so here is the plain version.
The lawsuits do not give you a reason to panic, but they are a useful reminder of what David is: a highly engineered product whose headline numbers depend on novel ingredients. If you are tracking calories tightly, it is reasonable to treat any bar that relies on a low-calorie fat substitute with a margin of error.
Our view has not changed since our review. David is a tool, not a food. It can be a convenient way to hit a protein target, but it should not be the foundation of your diet. Many people also report digestive discomfort from its combination of EPG and maltitol, which matters more day to day than the lawsuits do.
If the controversy makes you want a bar with a label you can read in five seconds, look at our list of the cleanest protein bars or our guide to whole food protein bars. You will give up some protein per calorie, but you will know exactly what you are eating. For the highest protein per calorie without EPG, see our list of high protein, low calorie bars.
There were two. A consumer class action over calories and fat was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs on March 30, 2026. A separate antitrust case over David's acquisition of EPG maker Epogee had a complaint dismissed in February 2026, but the judge allowed an amended complaint and the case was still open as of September 2026.
No court has found that. The class action alleged up to 83% more calories and 400% more fat based on lab testing, but the plaintiffs dropped the case before any ruling. David argued the testing method did not reflect how the body digests EPG.
The calorie case was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs, who did not publicly give a detailed reason in the coverage we reviewed. The antitrust complaint was dismissed because the judge found the plaintiffs had not properly defined the market.
EPG, or esterified propoxylated glycerol, is a modified plant-based fat that is designed to be only partly digested. It is described as providing about 0.7 calories per gram, compared with about 9 for regular fat.
Neither lawsuit was about safety. The main practical downside people report is digestive discomfort, which is linked to ingredients like maltitol and EPG. If you have a sensitive stomach, start with half a bar.
Sources: NBC News (March 13 and March 31, 2026), USA Today (April 1, 2026), Inc. (March 31, 2026), ABC News (March 13, 2026), Food Network (March 17, 2026), Food Business News (June 2025), AgFunderNews (June 2025 and April 2026), Bloomberg Law (February 5, 2026), the Lopez complaint (1:26-cv-635), and court filings in 1:25-cv-04544 (S.D.N.Y.). Checked September 2026.
Unearth the cleanest protein bars you can buy right now. (Some might even have superfoods)
Read MoreAt Protein Bar, we’re committed to helping you look and feel your best, which starts by raising the bar (pun intended) in the nutrition industry. We're currently in stealth mode, but you can join our waiting list to receive exclusive access to new products and become a beta tester!
