Dunkin energy drink lawsuit: what it claims and who could get paid

What the Dunkin energy drink lawsuit claims

On September 30, 2026, Phyllis C. Wells filed Wells v. Dunkin' Brands, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14463, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The defendants are Dunkin' Brands, which is based in Canton, Massachusetts, and Inspire Brands, which owns the Dunkin' brand. Wells says she bought Dunkin' Zero drinks two or three times a week at a Chicago drive-through, tries to limit her sugar, and relied on the drinks being sold as "zero sugar" and "0g of sugar."

Her complaint says that claim is false because the drinks are sweetened with allulose. It alleges a medium drink contains about 9 grams of it and a large 11 to 13 grams. These are allegations, not findings. The harm claimed is economic, that buyers paid a price premium for a drink that wasn't as advertised; the complaint doesn't say the drinks are unsafe. No judge has ruled, and nothing suggests Dunkin' has agreed to pay anyone.

What Dunkin's own pages show

The complaint leans on Dunkin's own documents, and they line up with its description. The Dunkin' Zero menu page says the drink has "0g of sugar," 145mg of caffeine and 20 calories in a medium, and doesn't mention allulose. Dunkin's allergen and ingredient guide, updated September 21, 2026, lists allulose as the first ingredient after water in the flavored syrups used in Dunkin' Zero drinks. Its nutrition guide lists a medium Tropical Mango Dunkin' Zero at 9 grams of total carbohydrate, with 0 grams of total sugars and 0 grams of added sugars.

The complaint reads those numbers together: nearly all of the carbohydrate is allulose, yet the sugar lines say zero. How the law treats that gap is the whole case.

Why allulose is at the center of the case

Allulose is a rare sugar used as a low-calorie sweetener. The complaint argues that a front-of-package "zero sugar" claim is governed by 21 C.F.R. § 101.60(c)(1), which allows it only if the food has under 0.5 grams of sugars per serving and no sugar ingredient without an asterisk. Because allulose is a monosaccharide, it says, it counts as a sugar for that test. It calls FDA's guidance on how allulose appears on the Nutrition Facts panel a nonbinding statement of enforcement discretion, not approval of a "zero sugar" claim.

It also relies on a 2026 Seventh Circuit decision, Franco v. Chobani, which reversed a trial-court ruling and which the complaint says found allulose is a sugar under the federal regulation and that such state-law claims aren't preempted. Our explainers Is allulose a sugar? and zero sugar label lawsuits cover the law, and the David protein bar lawsuit raises the same theory.

Who could be in the proposed class

The complaint proposes a nationwide class of anyone in the U.S. who bought a Dunkin' Zero drink at a Dunkin' restaurant for personal, family or household use from March 4, 2026, when the line launched, until a class is certified. It also proposes a subclass for purchases in Illinois. That's a proposal: no judge has certified anything, and nobody has to sign up.

The complaint says the claims exceed $5 million. That is the threshold for bringing a class action in federal court, not a damages demand or a settlement fund. If you buy Dunkin' Zero drinks, your card statements or app order history show what you bought; the plaintiff says she kept her card statements. If this ever settles, our guide to what no-proof settlements pay shows the usual range for small food and drink claims.

Where the Dunkin energy drink lawsuit stands

The case is brand new, so most of the milestones are still ahead. We couldn't open the court's docket, so check it for any response from Dunkin'.

What could happen next, and how long it takes

Expect Dunkin' to fight the claim, probably by asking the judge to dismiss it. Companies in zero-sugar cases commonly argue that FDA guidance permits the labeling, that federal law preempts state claims, or that shoppers weren't misled. A Seventh Circuit ruling isn't binding on a Massachusetts federal court, which sits in the First Circuit, so how this judge sees allulose matters.

If the case survives, the plaintiff then has to win class certification. Cases like this typically take years, and many are dismissed or end in modest settlements. Our guide to how a class action lawsuit works walks through the stages.

What you can do now

Nothing needs filing, and you shouldn't pay anyone to "join" this case. If you're curious about your own drink, Dunkin' publishes its ingredient and nutrition guides online, and the ingredient list is where allulose shows up. To hear about a settlement if one ever comes, see how to get notified of class action settlements or browse open cases in the settlements directory.

Owed finds the settlements you qualify for, explains them in plain English, opens the official claim form and reminds you before the deadline. Owed Pro is $2 for the first week, then $49 per year — one flat membership. Owed never takes a percentage of any payout. See which settlements match you.

This article is general information, not legal advice. Only a court can decide whether anyone is owed money in this case.

Glossary

Allulose

A rare sugar used as a low-calorie sweetener. It is a monosaccharide, the same category as fructose.

Nutrient content claim

A label statement about how much of a nutrient a food has, such as "zero sugar," which federal rules tightly define.

Proposed class

The group of buyers a plaintiff wants to represent. It becomes a real class only if a judge certifies it.

Subclass

A smaller group within a class, here Illinois buyers, whose state law may differ.

Preemption

The argument that federal food-labeling law overrides state-law claims. Defendants often raise it in labeling cases.

FAQ