Gruns sold mislabeled gummies with less fiber and niacin than listed, new class action lawsuit claims

California resident Esther Scott filed a class action lawsuit against Gruns Nutrition Inc. on July 22, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

The lawsuit alleges the company's Superfoods Greens Gummies contain less dietary fiber and niacin than the label declares and that Gruns advertised nutritional benefits the product does not deliver.

The product's fiber and niacin claims

Scott says she bought two units of Superfoods Greens Gummies at a Sprouts Farmers Market in Studio City in November 2025 after reviewing the label and seeing Instagram advertisements, according to the lawsuit. She allegedly relied on the fiber and niacin amounts printed on the package.

Gruns reportedly lists 6 grams of total dietary fiber and 16 milligrams of niacin on the label; however, the lawsuit alleges independent testing showed a serving contains 5.27 grams of fiber and 14.6 milligrams of niacin, which it calculates as 88% of the product's fiber claim.

Dietary fiber and niacin fall into a Food and Drug Administration category called Class I Nutrients, which under the compliance rules the complaint cites must be present in at least the amount the label declares.

The proposed class action lawsuit alleges Gruns falsely markets the gummies as comprehensive daily nutrition and tells customers every lot of its products undergoes "rigorous testing" to confirm they meet label claims.

What is the core nutrients blend?

Gruns advertises a proprietary core nutrients blend inside the supplement facts panel while identifying its individual ingredients outside that panel, the lawsuit claims. The split allegedly conflicts with FDA rules for declaring dietary ingredients and proprietary blends, which the complaint clams leaves consumers confused about the blend's contents.

The class action also alleges the label lists organic broccoli without any indication of which part of the plant the ingredient comes from, which fails a federal labeling rule.

The legal claims

Scott brings seven claims on behalf of a proposed nationwide class and a California subclass:

  • California False Advertising Law, which bars untrue or misleading advertising statements
  • California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, which is a consumer protection statute covering deceptive sales practices
  • California Unfair Competition Law, which covers unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices
  • Breach of express warranty, which contends the nutrient amounts Gruns printed on the label
  • Breach of implied warranty of merchantability, which requires goods to perform as ordinary buyers expect
  • Common law fraud, which alleges Gruns concealed the true nutrient content at the point of sale
  • Unjust enrichment, which is a theory that applies when a company profits unfairly at someone else's expense

What the case means for Gruns customers

The proposed nationwide class covers everyone in the United States who purchased the gummies within the limitations period with a separate subclass for California purchasers. The complaint estimates the class claims add up to more than $5 million.

Scott seeks monetary damages, restitution and an order requiring Gruns to disclose accurate fiber and niacin amounts and to stop advertising the figures it currently lists. As of this writing, there is no settlement, and the court has not ruled on the allegations.