The California woman suing Subway for claiming its tuna products contain ingredients other than tuna wants to drop her lawsuit because she is pregnant, prompting Subway to ask its lawyers to will be punished for bringing a frivolous case.
Nilima Amin said her “severe” morning sickness and “debilitating” conditions as she prepares for a third child have left her “unable to continue with obligations as a complainant,” and she should focus on his health and family.
Amin wants the case dismissed in federal court in San Francisco without prejudice, allowing him to sue again when he feels better.
In a May 4 filing, Subway said Amin’s plea failed the “straight-faced” test, and his lawyers likely realized it would not “just pay the windfall settlement they hoped for.” be obtained by carrying out a high-profile shakedown.”
Subway also said the “media frenzy” from the lawsuit caused serious damage, and blamed Amin’s “ever-changing” theories to justify claims that tuna sandwiches, salads and its wrapper contains “100% tuna.”
The chain wants Amin’s proposed class action dismissed, and his seven lawyers will pay at least $618,000 in legal fees.
Amin’s lawyers did not immediately respond Monday to requests for comment.
The plaintiff claims to have ordered Subway tuna products more than 100 times before being sued in January 2021.
He accused Subway of using other types of fish, chicken, pork and beef in its tuna products, or no tuna at all.
In July, U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco allowed Amin’s case to proceed but rejected his claim that “reasonable consumers” would expect only tuna and nothing else, calling it “the truth of life” that ingredients like mayonnaise are okay.
Subway has nearly 37,000 restaurants in over 100 countries.
The case is Amin v Subway Restaurants Inc et al, US District Court, Northern District of California, No. 21-00498.
(Reporting by Stempel in New York; Editing by Bill Berkrot)
Interested in Lawsuits?
Get automatic alerts for this topic.