Motion Seeks To Reinstate Lawsuit Over Ultra-Processed Food Health Risks

Amended lawsuit reveals plaintiff ate products that included Cheez-Its, Wheat Thins and other ultra-processed foods that were marketed as zero sugar, fat-free or lite, but actually caused diabetes and other diseases.

A Pennsylvania man is asking a federal judge to allow him to file an amended lawsuit over ultra-processed foods (UPF), updating allegations that were dismissed several weeks ago, including claims that the popular junk food products sold by major food brands led to his childhood diabetes.

Bryce Martinez originally filed the ultra-processed food lawsuit in December 2024, naming several of the nation’s largest food manufacturers as defendants, including Kraft Heinz, Coca-Cola and General Mills, raising allegations that the companies knowingly marketed unhealthy products to children while concealing the long-term health risks associated with excessive sugar, fat and chemical additives.

Martinez contends that this deceptive marketing and lack of transparency caused him to become addicted to ultra-processed foods (UPFs) as a child, leading to the development of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and childhood diabetes.

However, in August, U.S. District Judge Mia R. Perez of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the complaint lacked sufficient detail to establish liability. While the court noted that the defendants did not dispute that ultra-processed foods can contribute to chronic health conditions, Judge Perez ruled that Martinez had failed to identify which specific products he consumed or in what quantities.

Martinez is now seeking permission to refile the complaint, indicating that he can provide additional information about the specific UPF products and his consumption habits, to address problems with the original lawsuit identified by the court.

Ultra-Processed Food Health Risks

Concerns over ultra-processed foods (UPFs) have grown as industrial ingredients, such as artificial flavors, colors and preservatives, now make up a substantial portion of the average child’s diet in the United States. While these additives are used to enhance flavor, extend shelf life and improve texture, they provide little to no nutritional value. Emerging research now suggests that regular consumption of UPFs may significantly increase the risk of diabetes and other chronic illnesses, particularly among children.

Martinez’s lawsuit followed publication of a study in March 2024 that warned there was a strong link between consuming ultra-processed foods and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, along with other side effects like sleep disturbances, breathing issues and depression. Another study published that same month showed a link between ultra-processed foods and major heart problems, including heart attacks and heart failure.

According to the complaint, the food industry aggressively marketed UPFs to children, using their addictive properties to secure profits despite the known health risks. The lawsuit has been closely watched as one of the first in what could be a growing number of ultra-processed food lawsuits blaming the food industry for the U.S.’s declining health.

On September 22, Martinez filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint (PDF) and asked Judge Perez to reconsider granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

“In the Court’s Memorandum, it identified a factual deficiency in Plaintiff’s original complaint regarding the allegations relating to Plaintiffs’ consumption of Defendants’ injury-causing UPF. Accordingly, Plaintiff now seeks leave to file his proposed First Amended Complaint to specifically identify each Defendant’s UPF that he consumed.”

– Bryce Martinez v. Kraft Heinz Company Inc. et al.

Martinez argues that the refiling would address all of the deficiencies in the original complaint, pointing out that Judge Perez ruled that he “must at least designate the product alleged to be defective in order to recover from the one who sells it.”

The proposed refiled lawsuit, attached to the motion, names numerous items, many of them advertised as being fat-free, lite or zero sugar products, such as Boca Burger, Wheat Thins, Cheez-Its, Nature Valley Granola bars and Kraft House Italian Dressing.

Originally, the defendants were ordered to respond to the complaint by October 6. However, on the day of the deadline, the parties issued a joint stipulation (PDF) noting that they have agreed to give the Defendants until October 27 to respond, indicating that the motion to refile, accompanying memorandum of support and the amended complaint totaled 489 pages. Plaintiffs will have Until November 13 to reply to the defendants’ response.

The judge’s decision on whether the approach to Martinez’s amended complaint is sufficient to reinstate the lawsuit could have a significant impact on future claims, including how they are structured.