Defending Label Claims Built on FDA Enforcement Discretion: Allulose After Franco v. Chobani

Sarah L. Brew
August T. Horvath
Josephine Pechous
Sarah L. Brew | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
August T. Horvath | Foley Hoag LLP
Josephine Pechous | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Live Video-Broadcast: October 20, 2026

2 hour CLE

Tuition: $195.00
Subscribe to Federal Bar Association CLE Pass...
Co-Sponsored by myLawCLE
Get this course, plus over 1,000+ of live webinars.
Learn More
Training 5 or more people?

Sign-up for a law firm subscription plan and each attorney in the firm receives free access to all CLE Programs

Program Summary

 

The label was never the problem. The FDA guidance under it was

In July 2026 the Seventh Circuit reversed in Franco v. Chobani. The question was whether allulose is a sugar as defined by FDA. The answer reaches further. Labeling claims founded on FDA guidance or statements of enforcement discretion, rather than formal rulemaking, now carry real litigation risk. FDA’s own amicus brief undid the enforcement-discretion defense.

Rely on preemption, Auer deference, or primary jurisdiction, and Franco shows where each held and where each failed. Carry a front-of-package zero-sugar claim on an allulose product, and the reasonable consumer standard and survey evidence decide the motion. Face a multi-state consumer-fraud suit, and predominance, ascertainability, and damages decide certification. Pending cases in other circuits are watching.

You leave with a doctrinal map of the strongest remaining defense arguments, and a working read on class certification vulnerabilities. You also leave with a label-audit method that separates voluntary front-of-pack nutrient content claims from Nutrition Facts panel declarations. Use it to identify vulnerable claims across a client’s portfolio and advise on label changes or reformulation before the complaint arrives.

Key topics to be discussed:

  • Franco’s Procedural Arc
    Trace what the defense won and lost at each stage of Franco v. Chobani and what those outcomes mean for pending cases in other circuits.
  • FDA Amicus Fallout
    Understand how FDA’s own amicus brief undid the enforcement-discretion defense and why claims founded on guidance rather than formal rulemaking are now exposed.
  • Defense Motions in Depth
    Evaluate how preemption, Auer deference, and primary jurisdiction performed in Franco before deploying them in a pending zero-sugar case.
  • Reasonable Consumer Standard
    Weigh survey evidence against the reasonable consumer standard when a front-of-package zero-sugar claim is challenged.
  • Class Certification Defense
    Attack predominance, ascertainability, and damages in multi-state consumer-fraud suits before certification is decided.
  • Portfolio Label Audit
    Identify every claim resting on informal guidance rather than a codified rule, separate Nutrition Facts panel declarations from front-of-pack nutrient content claims, and test whether an FDA marketing permit or formal comment process insulates a label from state-law challenge.

This course is co-sponsored with myLawCLE.

Date / Time: October 20, 2026

  • 2:30 pm – 4:40 pm Eastern
  • 1:30 pm – 3:40 pm Central
  • 12:30 pm – 2:40 pm Mountain
  • 11:30 am – 1:40 pm Pacific

Closed-captioning available

Speakers

Sarah L. Brew, Partner | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Sarah Brew defends Fortune 500 food companies and retailers in consumer fraud class actions challenging the labeling and advertising of food products, including ingredient and nutrient content claims, “healthy” claims, and sustainability practices, and counsels food industry clients on labeling, advertising, and marketing regulations and litigation risk management. She leads Faegre Drinker’s food litigation and regulatory practice, which is nationally ranked by Chambers USA, and is one of only six lawyers in the country ranked in Band 1 by Chambers USA in Food & Beverages: Regulatory and Litigation.

  • Education & Credentials

Sarah earned her J.D. magna cum laude from the University of Minnesota Law School, where she was elected to the Order of the Coif, and her B.A. magna cum laude from the University of Minnesota. She is admitted to practice in Minnesota and Wisconsin and before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Wisconsin.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Chambers USA has ranked Sarah nationwide in Food & Beverages: Regulatory & Litigation every year from 2013 through 2026. She is recognized in The Best Lawyers in America for Food and Beverage Law (2027), was named one of Minnesota Lawyer’s Top Women in Law in 2026, and was listed in Minnesota Super Lawyers for Class Action/Mass Tort from 2012 through 2023. Additional honors include Acritas Star Lawyer (2018–19), the Minneapolis/St. Paul Business Journal Women in Business award (2018), inclusion in Who’s Who in Product Liability Defence, and a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent peer review rating. Within the firm she leads the food litigation and regulatory practice and is a leader of the national food and agribusiness industry group, which comprises more than 150 attorneys.

  • Professional Involvement

Sarah speaks nationally on food labeling litigation, with presentations including “Consumer Fraud Labeling Class Actions: What’s Next?,” “Class Actions Procedure Update – Substantive Claims: Slackfill, Added Sugar, and Beyond,” “Food Labeling Class Actions and Strategies for Dealing With and Preventing Litigation” before the Food and Drug Law Institute, and the firm’s “Top 10 Food Regulatory and Litigation Developments From 2025” webinar. She has addressed the Consumer Brands Association, the Food Marketing Institute, the Food and Drug Law Institute, and the International Association for Food Protection. She served as co-chair of the American Bar Association’s Food & Supplements Subcommittee (2015–17), serves on the Food and Drug Law Institute’s Food and Dietary Supplements Committee and the Minnesota State Bar Association Food and Drug Law Section Council, is a member of the American Law Institute, and was elected to Food Lawyers Network International.

  • Experience

For more than 20 years Sarah has focused on guiding food industry clients through regulatory, litigation, and business challenges. Her labeling work spans defense of consumer fraud class actions and counseling on FDA and USDA compliance, including published analyses of FDA’s proposed update to the definition of “healthy” on food labels and of the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright and Corner Post decisions and their implications for food industry regulations. She has also served as national counsel in many of the highest-profile outbreaks and recalls of the past two decades, guides clients through recalls, inspections, enforcement actions, and government investigations, and handles complex commercial litigation over the allocation and recovery of recall-related expenses, as well as supply chain contracts and due diligence in food company transactions.

 

August T. Horvath, Ph.D., Partner and Chair, Advertising & Marketing Practice | Foley Hoag LLP

August Horvath chairs the Advertising & Marketing Practice at Foley Hoag LLP in New York. His litigation, counseling, government enforcement, and self-regulatory practice spans all sectors of consumer products and services, with a particular focus on food and beverage labeling. He represents clients in private false advertising and deceptive practices litigation and in matters before the Federal Trade Commission, state Attorneys General, and the National Advertising Division. His Ph.D. and hands-on experience in survey research and statistical analysis inform his work developing substantiation protocols, designing and assessing research into the implied meaning of advertising claims, and working with and against expert witnesses.

  • Education & Credentials

August earned his J.D. cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1996 and his Ph.D. in Communication Theory and Research from the University of Southern California in 1993, following studies at the University of Windsor (1988). He is admitted to the New York bar and practices before the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, the U.S. District Courts for the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois, and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Chambers USA 2026 recognizes August as a leading lawyer in Food & Beverages: Regulatory & Litigation, and he has been listed among premier attorneys in The Legal 500 and New York Super Lawyers. The Food and Drug Law Institute presented him with its 2021 Service to FDLI Award. He is a fellow of the American Bar Foundation and chairs the firm’s Advertising & Marketing Practice.

  • Professional Involvement

August has chaired the planning committee of the Food and Drug Law Institute’s Food Advertising, Labeling, and Litigation Conference and moderated its panels on current labeling issues and the year’s key court decisions, and he wrote the introduction to FDLI’s Top Food and Drug Cases, 2025. He serves as co-chair of the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law Agriculture and Food Committee, and in April 2026 presented the firm’s webinar on substantiating AI-driven advertising claims and testimonials.

  • Experience

Over a career of more than 20 years, August has represented companies in the food and beverage, pharmaceutical, retail, sporting and consumer goods, and online services industries in false advertising and deceptive practices disputes, counseling them on how to substantiate and defend the marketing claims they wish to make and helping them challenge false and disparaging advertising by competitors. His antitrust experience includes civil and criminal matters with the Department of Justice Antitrust Division, FTC investigations, merger-related litigation, and private litigation. He joined Foley Hoag as a partner in January 2018 after serving as a partner in the New York office of Kelley Drye & Warren.

 

Josephine Pechous, Associate | Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Josephine Pechous is particularly well versed in the labeling and advertising of food products and dietary supplements, advising on regulatory compliance and industry best practices while anticipating potential litigation risks. As a member of Faegre Drinker’s nationally recognized food litigation and regulatory practice, she supports teams defending producers, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers in consumer class actions, foodborne illness litigation, and complex food contamination cases, with regulatory experience spanning product labeling and claim substantiation, food safety, dietary supplements, animal agriculture, and toxic torts.

  • Education & Credentials

Josephine earned her J.D. summa cum laude from Vermont Law School in 2024 with a concentration in Food and Agriculture Law & Policy, serving as senior notes editor of the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law, and her B.A. summa cum laude in Molecular and Cellular Biology/Biochemistry from Drake University in 2021. She is admitted in Minnesota and before the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.

  • Recognition & Leadership

Vermont Law and Graduate School honored Josephine with its Learned Hand Award and its Scholarship & Leadership Award in 2024, and she was named to Faegre Drinker’s Pro Bono Honor Roll for 2024–25.

  • Professional Involvement

Josephine writes on food labeling and product litigation, including “Dorris v. Danone: Stemming the Tide of Greenwashing Litigation” (January 2025), “Standing on Shaky Ground: Product Recalls Alone Do Not Constitute an Injury in Fact” on the Faegre Drinker on Products blog (September 2025), and “What is Country of Origin Labeling?” for the Center for Agriculture and Food Systems’ Labels Unwrapped (May 2024). She is a member of the Minnesota State Bar Association New Lawyers Section and contributes to the firm’s Pro Bono Immigration Team, the Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services Wills Clinic, the Volunteer Lawyers Network Housing Clinic, and Advocates for Human Rights.

  • Experience

Josephine translates complex food regulations into actionable solutions and drafts pleadings and client communications tailored to each matter’s objectives. As a law student she worked with small businesses on food labeling compliance and analyzed agricultural programs to inform legislative initiatives, and she joined Faegre Drinker after serving as a summer associate. She draws on a background in the biological sciences and hands-on experience in food science, bioinformatics, and sustainability.

Agenda

SESSION 1 – Motion Practice and Class Defense in Zero-Sugar Labeling Cases | 2:30pm – 3:30pm

This session examines the defense motion strategy and class certification arguments available to food and beverage companies facing zero-sugar labeling claims after the Seventh Circuit’s reversal in Franco v. Chobani. Attorneys will analyze how preemption, Auer deference, primary jurisdiction, and the reasonable consumer standard performed — and failed — at each stage of the Franco litigation, and what those outcomes mean for pending cases in other circuits. Participants will leave with a doctrinal map of the strongest remaining defense arguments, a working understanding of class certification vulnerabilities in multi-state consumer-fraud suits, and a framework for advising clients whose allulose-containing products carry front-of-package zero-sugar claims.

BREAK | 3:30pm – 3:40pm

SESSION 2 – Sweet Spot: Evaluating Label Claims That Rest on FDA Enforcement Discretion or Guidance | 3:40 pm – 4:40pm

This session examines the regulatory and litigation risk created in the wake of the Seventh Circuit’s July 2026 holding in Franco v. Chobani. The implications of the Court’s opinion extend far beyond whether allulose is a sugar as defined by FDA. Rather, the Court’s decision suggests that food labeling claims founded upon FDA guidance or statements of enforcement discretion, rather than formal rulemaking, are fraught with litigation risk. Consequently, companies should review their labels to identify potentially implicated claims and take necessary states make label changes or reformulate products. Attendees will learn to distinguish between voluntary front-of-pack nutrient content claims and Nutrition Facts panel declarations, both of which are impacted by the Franco court’s reasoning. Attorneys completing this session will be equipped to identify vulnerable labeling and marketing claims and advise clients accordingly.

Credits

Alaska

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through Alaska’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity.
Alabama

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Arkansas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Arizona

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

California

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Colorado

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Connecticut

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

District of Columbia

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Delaware

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Florida

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 General Hours

Receive CLE credit in Florida via attorney submission.
Georgia

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Hawaii

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Iowa

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Idaho

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Illinois

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Indiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Kansas

Pending CLE Approval
2 Substantive

Kentucky

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Louisiana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Massachusetts

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maryland

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Maine

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Michigan

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Minnesota

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Missouri

Approved for CLE Credits
2.4 General

Mississippi

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Montana

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

North Dakota

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through North Dakota’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity. Section 1, Policy 1.14
Nebraska

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

myLawCLE reports attendance to Nebraska on each attorney’s behalf for all programs. Please do not self-report.
New Hampshire

Approved for CLE Credits
120 General minutes

As of July 1, 2014, the NHMCLE Board no longer provides pre- or post-approval of courses. Attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance online at www.nhbar.org, based on qualification provisions of Rule 53.
New Jersey

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New Jersey’s recognition of multi-jurisdictional reciprocity, except for the courses required under BCLE Reg. 201:2
New Mexico

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Nevada

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

New York

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Our programs are CLE-eligible through New York’s Approved Jurisdiction Group “B”.
Ohio

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Oklahoma

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

Oregon

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Pennsylvania

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Rhode Island

Pending CLE Approval
2.5 General

South Carolina

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

South Dakota

No MCLE Required
2 CLE Hour(s)

Tennessee

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Texas

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Utah

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

Virginia

Not Eligible
2 General Hours

Vermont

Approved for CLE Credits
2 General

Washington

Approved via Attorney Submission
2 Law & Legal Hours

Receive CLE credit in Washington via attorney submission.
Wisconsin

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

West Virginia

Pending CLE Approval
2.4 General

Wyoming

Pending CLE Approval
2 General

More CLE Webinars
Upcoming CLE Webinars
Getting Rid of Tax Penalties (Presented by Tax Rep)
Getting Rid of Tax Penalties (Presented by Tax Rep) Mon, October 12, 2026
Live Webcast
The Necessary Evils of Funding a Trust
The Necessary Evils of Funding a Trust Wed, October 14, 2026
Live Webcast