Gruns class action lawsuit overview:
- Who: A group of consumers is suing Gruns Nutrition Inc. and Unilever United States Inc.
- Why: The plaintiffs allege the companies falsely advertised their allulose-sweetened dietary supplement gummies as sugar-free.
- Where: The Gruns class action lawsuit was filed in New Jersey federal court.
A group of consumers has filed a class action lawsuit against Unilever and Gruns Nutrition, alleging the companies falsely advertised their allulose-sweetened dietary supplement gummies as sugar-free.
Plaintiff Marian Ulberg and three others filed the class action lawsuit against Unilever and Gruns Nutrition in New Jersey federal court on Aug. 31. They allege that the companies’ “sugar-free” label misleads consumers into believing the products contain no sugar, when, in fact, they contain between 6 and 9 grams of allulose per serving.
The plaintiffs argue that allulose is a sugar, as it is a monosaccharide that falls within the definition of total sugars under federal regulation.
They allege that the companies violated federal law by labeling the gummies as sugar-free, which is only allowed for products that contain less than 0.5 grams of sugars per serving.
Gruns simply replaced cane sugar with allulose, lawsuit claims
According to the class action lawsuit, Unilever and Gruns Nutrition sell the allulose-sweetened gummies under the “Gruns” brand and related brands, such as “immun” and “nutrops.”
The plaintiffs argue that Gruns simply replaced 8 grams of cane sugar with 8 grams of allulose and labeled the result “sugar free.”
“[The] defendant thus knew the quantity of sweetening carbohydrate in each product because it printed that quantity on the package,” the Gruns class action lawsuit says. “It declared that quantity as sugar on the cane-sugar package and as no sugar on the sugar-free package.”
However, the plaintiffs claim that this substitution is misleading, as allulose is still a sugar that should be counted in the total sugars declaration on the nutrition label.
The Gruns class action lawsuit alleges that the companies’ sugar-free claim is material, as consumers who choose products labeled as sugar-free are making a decision about sugar intake.
The plaintiffs say that they relied on the sugar-free label when purchasing the products and would not have bought them or would have paid less for them if they knew the true sugar content.
The plaintiffs are seeking to represent a nationwide class of consumers who bought the products as well as subclasses in New York, California and Pennsylvania.
They are suing for violations of state consumer protection laws, breach of warranties and unjust enrichment and are seeking damages, restitution and injunctive relief.
In related news, Olly is facing class action claims that its apple cider vinegar-based Metabolism Gummy Rings contain an insignificant amount of acetic acid and are primarily composed of sugar.
Have you ever purchased Gruns sugar-free gummies? Let us know in the comments.
The plaintiffs are represented by Joseph J. DePalma, Susana Cruz Hodge and Catherine B. Derenze of Lite DePalma Greenberg & Afanador LLC and Jennifer Kraus-Czeisler, Todd McClelland and Christopher Hurld of Sterlington PLLC.
The Gruns class action lawsuit is Ulberg, et al. v. Gruns Nutrition Inc., et al., Case No. 2:26-cv-11269, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
