California woman's lawsuit alleging Subway tuna contains other ingredients dismissed

A high-profile lawsuit which was filed by a woman in California claiming that the tuna products of Subway contained ingredients other than tuna was dismissed.

The chain, which has around 37,000 restaurants in more than 100 countries, and the lawsuit's plaintiff Nilima Amin have "come to agreement regarding dismissing the case with prejudice," which means the issues can not be brought again, as per court records.

Subway said that the decision of US District Judge Jon Tigar to dismiss the case on Thursday (July 27) was welcomed by them.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

Later, a California-based judge will rule on Subway's request that the lawyers of Amin be sanctioned for bringing a frivolous class action.

ALSO READ |Too soon? Subway's insensitive 'our subs don't implode' sign after Titan tragedy angers netizens

"Subway serves 100% real, wild-caught tuna," said the chain in a statement. "The lawsuit and the plaintiff's meritless claims, which have always lacked any supporting evidence, resulted in the spread of harmful misinformation and caused damage to Subway franchisees and the brand," it added.

Amin's lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment made by Reuters news agency.

OrderedSubway tuna products more than 100 times before lawsuit

Amin had stated that she had ordered Subway tuna products more than 100 times before filing a lawsuit against it in January 2021, making a claim that its tuna sandwiches, wraps and salads included other fish species, chicken, pork and cattle, and did not have any tuna at all.

In May, she requested to end the lawsuit because she became pregnant, and was experiencing "severe" morning sickness and "debilitating" conditions which made it impossible for her to fulfil her roles as a plaintiff.

This prompted Subway to demand sanctions, stating that the proposed exit of Amin reflected her lawyers' realisation it would not pay a "windfall settlement" in their "high-profile shakedown."

WATCH |Subway: Our subs don't implode like Titan

Subway further faulted the "ever-changing" theories of Amin to debunk its claim which claimed that its tuna products were "100% tuna."

Amin's lawyers, while opposing sanctions, said she had a "good faith, non-frivolous basis based on testing and evidence that there was something amiss" with Subway tuna.

Last July, Tigar allowed the continuation of the case but rejected the claim of Amin that tuna was the only acceptable ingredient, calling it a "fact of life" that other ingredients like mayonnaise were okay.

(With inputs from agencies)

You cannow write forwionews.comand be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with ushere.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE