Plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Subway over its tuna sandwiches filed a second, amended complaint on Nov. 8 asserting that Subway’s “tuna” contains chicken, pork, and cattle DNA.
The plaintiffs, Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin, previously filed the suit arguing that Subway’s tuna was not authentic. A judge dismissed the case on Oct. 7 with “leave to amend,” saying that the plaintiffs did not adequately identify the misstatements that they alleged Subway made. With the new assertions, the plaintiffs are hoping to move the case forward.
“The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration,” Subway states on a webpage dedicated to the issue. “A favorite among sub lovers, our tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real.”
DOES THE SUBWAY TUNA SANDWICH CONTAIN TUNA?
The amended lawsuit claims that marine biologist Paul Barber conducted tests on 20 samples of Subway tuna products from 20 different Subway shops in Southern California. It claims the DNA test results concluded that there were no detectable tuna DNA sequences in 19 of the 20 samples. It said that all 20 samples had chicken DNA, 11 had pork DNA, and 7 had cattle DNA.
A spokesperson for Subway vehemently denied the allegations, stating that Subway uses 100% real tuna and noting that the plaintiffs have repeatedly changed their story.
“The plaintiffs have filed three meritless complaints, changing their story each time,” he said. “The fact remains that Subway tuna is real and strictly regulated by the FDA in the U.S., and other government entities around the world.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The spokesperson for Subway also said that the company plans to file another motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
