Kroger Allulose Lawsuit: Zero Sugar Syrup Class Action
A class action says Kroger's Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup has 22 grams of allulose per serving. See what it claims and why no claim form exists.
A class action filed in October 2026 alleges that Kroger's Simple Truth Zero Sugar maple-flavored syrup lists 22 grams of allulose per serving despite its "Zero Sugar" label, according to news reports on the complaint.
The Kroger allulose lawsuit, Newton v. The Kroger Co., alleges that Simple Truth Zero Sugar maple-flavored syrup is labeled "Zero Sugar" and "0g Added Sugar." Top Class Actions reports that the label discloses 22 grams of allulose per serving. No class has been certified. As of November 2, 2026, no settlement or claim form has been reported or announced, so no buyer is covered by any payout.
The proposed classes, as reported, are an Illinois class plus seven other states. Top Class Actions reports that the complaint relies on a July 2026 appeals court ruling in a case over Chobani yogurt that treated allulose as a sugar. The complaint itself was not reviewed for this page. According to Supermarket News, Kroger had not responded to a request for comment.
What the Kroger Allulose Lawsuit Claims
According to Top Class Actions and Supermarket News, the Kroger allulose lawsuit claims that Simple Truth Zero Sugar maple-flavored syrup carries "Zero Sugar" and "0g Added Sugar" labels. Both reports say the label discloses 22 grams of allulose per serving. Both reports also say the Nutrition Facts panel lists 0 grams of sugar. Supermarket News reports that allulose is the first ingredient by weight.
Top Class Actions reports these case details:
| Detail | As Reported by Top Class Actions |
|---|---|
| Case name | Newton v. The Kroger Co. |
| Case number | 1:26-cv-12573 |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Filed | October 14, 2026 |
| Plaintiff | Michael Newton |
| Plaintiff's counsel | Kevin Laukaitis |
Supermarket News does not name the court or a case number. It says only that Newton filed in Illinois in mid-October 2026.
The plaintiff's theory, as reported by Top Class Actions, is that allulose is a monosaccharide and therefore a sugar under the federal and Illinois labeling standards. Under that theory, a product may be called sugar free only if it has less than 0.5 gram of sugar per serving. Top Class Actions reports that the complaint relies on the Seventh Circuit decision in Franco v. Chobani.
The complaint, as reported, brings claims under Illinois and other states' consumer fraud laws, plus a claim for unjust enrichment. Top Class Actions says the plaintiff asks for a jury trial, declaratory relief, restitution, and actual, compensatory, statutory and punitive damages. Supermarket News reports that Newton says he paid a premium because of the no-sugar label and would not have bought the syrup had he known it contained a sugar product.
These points are allegations. No court has ruled on whether Kroger's label is accurate. Supermarket News says Kroger, which it describes as Cincinnati-based, had not responded to a request for comment, and no source read reports a Kroger statement, answer or motion in the case.
Who the Proposed Classes Would Cover
The Kroger Simple Truth syrup lawsuit proposes an Illinois class plus seven other states, and none of those classes has been certified by the court. Top Class Actions describes two proposed groups, while Supermarket News describes one proposed class covering shoppers in the same eight states.
| Item | What Is Reported | What Is Unknown |
|---|---|---|
| Illinois class | All persons in Illinois who bought the syrup for personal use (Top Class Actions) | Whether the court will certify it |
| Multistate class | Buyers in Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York and Washington (Top Class Actions) | Whether the court will certify it |
| Product | Simple Truth Zero Sugar Maple-Flavored Syrup (Supermarket News) | Whether the label wording in the reports matches the current product label |
| Class period | The reports read do not give one | The purchase dates any class would cover |
| Class size | Not reported | How many buyers any class would include |
| Payment | No settlement or claim form reported or announced | Any per-person amount, claim form, deadline or notice |
A buyer in one of those eight states falls inside a proposed class definition, as reported. That status creates no right to money today. A proposed class is a request in the complaint, and the court has not decided whether the case can go forward on behalf of any group.
A buyer outside those eight states is not named in either proposed class, according to the reports. The exact class wording is in the complaint, which was not reviewed for this page.
Why Allulose Is Disputed on Labels
Allulose is disputed on labels because federal regulations limit "sugar free" claims to foods with less than 0.5 gram of sugars per serving. Courts and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have treated allulose differently under those rules. Two sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) are at the center of the dispute.
- 21 C.F.R. 101.60(c)(1) covers sugar content claims. A food may claim to be sugar free only if it contains less than 0.5 gram of sugars per reference amount and per labeled serving.
- 21 C.F.R. 101.9(c)(6)(ii) is the Nutrition Facts provision that defines total sugars.
In 2020, the FDA issued guidance saying it would use enforcement discretion to exclude allulose from the "Total Sugars" and "Added Sugars" declarations pending rulemaking, according to the Skadden analysis of Franco v. Chobani. Skadden says no rulemaking has occurred.
Franco v. Chobani, LLC, No. 25-2087, involved Chobani Zero Sugar yogurt, which allegedly contained four grams of sugar, according to the Leagle case page. The district court deferred to the FDA's 2020 guidance, found the claims preempted and dismissed the suit. On July 27, 2026, the Seventh Circuit reversed that dismissal.
The Illinois State Bar Association summary says the court held that "allulose is a sugar under the relevant federal regulation." Skadden describes the holding this way: allulose, a monosaccharide not listed in the regulation, counts toward "total sugars" under 21 C.F.R. 101.9(c)(6)(ii). The court held the plaintiffs plausibly alleged consumer deception, so the suit against Chobani may proceed. Judge Kirsch wrote the opinion, with Judges Rovner and Maldonado concurring.
Skadden also reports three further points about the decision:
- The FDA argued in an amicus brief that the regulation covers allulose.
- The court left "no added sugar" claims open.
- Chobani preserved other arguments for remand.
Franco binds only federal courts in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, according to Skadden, and other courts may reach different conclusions. The Kroger case was filed in a federal court in Illinois, as reported. No court has ruled on Kroger's label, and the Franco holding does not decide whether the Newton complaint will succeed. A reported wave of similar "zero sugar" suits has followed Franco, but no source read gives a count.
Court Process for the Kroger Allulose Lawsuit
The Kroger allulose lawsuit is at its first stage, a filed complaint, and money reaches class members only through a judgment or a court-approved settlement followed by a claims process. A class action usually moves through these stages:
- One or more named plaintiffs file a complaint. Michael Newton filed this one on October 14, 2026, according to Top Class Actions.
- The defendant responds, often with a motion to dismiss. No source read reports a Kroger answer or motion.
- If the case continues, the court decides whether to certify a class.
- The case ends in a dismissal, a judgment or a settlement. Only a judgment or a court-approved settlement can lead to a claims process.
There is no standard payout in class actions. The guide to how class action settlements work explains the process in more detail.
Several points about the Kroger case are unknown as of November 2, 2026:
- Whether Kroger will contest the claims.
- Any hearing or ruling date.
- Whether a class will be certified, and how large it would be.
- Whether the suit will settle.
Other consumer cases at different stages are listed on the class actions hub.
Steps for Simple Truth Syrup Buyers
Buyers of Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup have no claim to file, because no settlement or claim form has been reported or announced. A few steps can preserve proof in case a court-approved notice is issued later:
- Keep receipts for any Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup you bought.
- Save your Kroger loyalty-card purchase history, if you have one.
- Keep the package or a photo of the label.
- Rely only on a court-approved notice for any claim route.
- Do not pay anyone to "file" or "claim" anything for this case.
This syrup lawsuit is separate from the Kroger pharmacy copay settlement, which has its own guide.
If you bought Simple Truth Zero Sugar maple syrup, no source read reports a settlement or claim form, so there is nothing to file. The suit is at the pleading stage as reported, with proposed and uncertified classes. Franco v. Chobani, as reported, held allulose is a sugar under the federal regulation, but it binds only federal courts in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, and no court has ruled on Kroger's label. A Kroger response, a ruling, class certification or a settlement would change what a buyer should do. Keep your receipts or loyalty-card history for the Kroger allulose lawsuit, and treat any claim offer that does not come through a court-approved notice with care.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Kroger allulose class action about?
Newton v. The Kroger Co. alleges that Simple Truth Zero Sugar maple-flavored syrup is labeled "Zero Sugar" and "0g Added Sugar" while its label discloses 22 grams of allulose per serving, according to Top Class Actions. The plaintiff argues allulose is a sugar under federal and Illinois labeling standards. These are allegations, and no court has ruled on Kroger's label.
Who could be covered by the Kroger Simple Truth syrup lawsuit?
The proposed classes, as reported, are an Illinois class plus seven other states: Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York and Washington. Top Class Actions says the Illinois class covers persons who bought the syrup for personal use. No class has been certified.
Is there a settlement or claim form in the Kroger allulose lawsuit?
No settlement or claim form has been reported or announced as of November 2, 2026. Money reaches class members only through a judgment or a court-approved settlement followed by a claims process. There is no standard payout, and no per-person amount, deadline or notice has been reported.
Is allulose a sugar?
According to the Illinois State Bar Association and Skadden summaries, the Seventh Circuit held in Franco v. Chobani that allulose is a sugar under the relevant federal regulation and counts toward total sugars under 21 C.F.R. 101.9(c)(6)(ii). In 2020, the FDA said it would use enforcement discretion to exclude allulose from the "Total Sugars" and "Added Sugars" declarations pending rulemaking, and Skadden says no rulemaking has occurred. Franco binds only federal courts in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin.
Does the Chobani ruling decide the Kroger case?
No court has ruled on Kroger's label. Franco v. Chobani reversed a dismissal and let a yogurt suit proceed, and the Newton complaint relies on it, according to Top Class Actions. Skadden says Franco binds only federal courts in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, and other courts may reach different conclusions.
What should I keep if I bought Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup?
Keep receipts, a Kroger loyalty-card purchase history or the package for any Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup you bought. That proof may help if a court-approved notice later asks for it. Do not pay anyone to "file" or "claim" anything.
Is this the same as the Kroger pharmacy copay settlement?
No. The syrup case is Newton v. The Kroger Co., a proposed class action over Simple Truth Zero Sugar syrup labels with no settlement reported. The Kroger pharmacy copay settlement is a separate matter with its own guide.
Not sure where you stand?
Check your eligibility in under 2 minutes — free, private, and no commitment required.