Breaking Down Beyond Meat: Don Lee Allegation Echoed By Class Action Suit

The court filings are starting to pile up around Beyond Meat, this time in the form of a consumer class action lawsuit. The plant-based food manufacturer, which has been in a tiff with former manufacturing partner Don Lee Farms for almost five years that has spurred derivative actions from investors, and a stream of countersuits and supplementary litigation, has now been hit with a case by consumers claiming they’ve been misled and lied to about the comparability of Beyond’s protein to animal products.

A group of six plaintiffs filed a class action suit in Illinois District court against Beyond Meat last week, just two days before its former manufacturing partner, Don Lee, filed its second suit against the company. While Don Lee’s legal team leveled a myriad of accusations against Beyond Meat, ranging from the capabilities of its CEO to misleading nutrition and ingredient labels, the consumer-led case focused specifically on Beyond’s protein claims.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff’s legal team commissioned an independent laboratory test that found all but four Beyond Meat products contained significantly less protein than stated on its nutrition panel. Beyond Sausages and Beef Patties had the most significant variation among their actual protein content versus what was reported on-pack.

For example, “[Beyond Meat’s] Beyond Beef Plant-Based Ground 16 oz. patties, which is labeled as ‘20G Per Serving’ and ‘40% DV’ for protein, actually contains 19 g per serving by nitrogen testing, and 7% DV for protein,” the complaint explains. “This represents an underfill of 5% for protein content and an underfill of 33% for %DV for protein.”

In response to both the Don Lee filing and class action suit, a Beyond Meat spokesperson said “the allegations in the filing are unfounded and not representative of Beyond Meat’s products. We are prepared to vigorously fight this case.”

The class action complaint does not state which four products do not contain misleading protein information. A similar analysis of Beyond’s protein contents was also conducted independently by Don Lee’s legal team, and serves as a central aspect of that case, but Don Lee focused solely on Beyond patties and crumble products.

The protein ‘underfill’ can be explained by the nitrogen testing methodology Beyond used to calculate its protein daily values, which the class action complaint notes is typically an industry-accepted practice. However, since Beyond’s brand and product positioning, which it claims offers “the nutritional profile of their animal protein equivalents,” is weighted by its protein percentage value, the company is required to use the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) by the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (FDCA) and the Food and Drug Administration.

“For a product like [Beyond Meat], the protein content may be calculated using the nitrogen method, but it also must be stated as a percentage of the Daily Reference Value using the corrected amount of protein,” the class action reads. “This alternative to the nitrogen method (PDCAAS) is only required in the statement of percentage; it is not required for statements of absolute protein [in grams].”

Both complaints also allege that Beyond’s stated protein percentage values have created unfair marketplace competition and establish that the company would not have achieved its level of success in the plant-based meat space nor attracted its star-studded roster of support if its products did not claim to offer nutrients comparable to animal proteins.

A spokesperson for Don Lee said the company “plans to vigorously pursue this case and prove that Beyond Meat’s claims have been misleading to consumers.”

Counsel for the class action suit, Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman, Pllc, could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.