{"id":18262,"date":"2026-05-22T10:48:10","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T10:48:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/2026\/05\/22\/raw-nutrition-class-action-claims-protein-shakes-contain-less-protein-than-advertised-class-action-lawsuits\/"},"modified":"2026-05-22T10:48:10","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T10:48:10","slug":"raw-nutrition-class-action-claims-protein-shakes-contain-less-protein-than-advertised-class-action-lawsuits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/globalnewstoday.uk\/index.php\/2026\/05\/22\/raw-nutrition-class-action-claims-protein-shakes-contain-less-protein-than-advertised-class-action-lawsuits\/","title":{"rendered":"Raw Nutrition class action claims protein shakes contain less protein than advertised – Class Action Lawsuits"},"content":{"rendered":"

A new class action lawsuit accuses Raw Nutrition of falsely advertising the protein content of its Raw Isolate Protein shakes.
Plaintiff Daniel Ruchman claims Raw Nutrition markets its ready-to-drink protein shakes as containing 30 grams of protein per serving, even though independent testing allegedly showed the products contain significantly less protein than advertised.
According to the complaint, Raw Nutrition sells the shakes in multiple flavors, including chocolate, vanilla, strawberry, cookies and cream, salted caramel and mocha latte. The products are marketed as gluten-free meal replacement shakes intended for post-workout consumption.
The class action lawsuit alleges the products prominently state \u201c30g protein\u201d on the front label and repeat the same claim in the Nutrition Facts panel.
Ruchman says he purchased the chocolate flavor in January 2026 from a Vitamin Shoppe store in Thousand Oaks, California, relying on the protein content representations when making his purchase.
The class action lawsuit states independent laboratory testing conducted in December 2025 allegedly found protein levels ranging from approximately 26.4 grams to 28 grams per serving across the tested flavors.
According to the lawsuit, the alleged protein shortfalls ranged from about 7% to 12% below the labeled amount.
The complaint alleges the shakes use milk protein isolate and calcium caseinate as primary protein sources and argues federal labeling regulations do not permit shortfalls in protein content for products formulated with added protein ingredients.
Ruchman claims consumers rely on protein labeling to monitor dietary intake, maintain weight and meet fitness goals, and that accurate nutritional labeling is especially important for protein-focused diets and workout routines.
The class action lawsuit alleges consumers paid a premium price for the products based on the protein claims and would not have purchased the shakes, or would have paid less for them, had they known the true protein content.
The complaint asserts claims for violations of California consumer protection laws, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment.
Ruchman seeks to represent a class of California consumers who purchased the products within the applicable limitations period and is requesting damages, restitution, injunctive relief and corrective advertising.
Last year, a consumer sued MUSH Foods Inc.<\/strong><\/a>, alleging it misled consumers by marketing its protein overnight oats as containing 15 grams of protein per serving without disclosing that the protein is lower quality and less digestible than animal-based protein.
What do you think about these claims against Raw Nutrition? Let us know in the comments.<\/em><\/strong>
Ruchman is represented by Charles C. Weller of Charles C. Weller APC.
The Raw Nutrition class action lawsuit<\/strong> is Ruchman v. Raw Nutrition Inc.<\/em>, Case No. 2:26-cv-04163-CV-RAO, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits<\/a> and Class Action Settlements<\/a> you may qualify to join!<\/strong>
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:<\/strong>
"*<\/span>" indicates required fields