Woman who sued Subway over ‘fake’ tuna moves to drop case; sub chain demands payment for legal fees
The woman who claimed Subway’s tuna sandwich was made with fake tuna has moved to drop her case.
Nilima Amin claimed in a recent filing that she cannot continue the case because she is pregnant and dealing with “severe” morning sickness and other conditions ahead of the birth of her third child, Reuters reported Monday.
Amin requested to drop the case without prejudice, allowing her to potentially refile it, according to Reuters.
Subway seized on the request to bash Amin and call her lawsuit a “high-profile shakedown.” The fast-food giant argued that the “media frenzy” around the case cost the company dearly and requested that each of Amin’s seven attorneys pay $618,000 of its legal fees.
Amin’s lawsuit, initially filed with Karen Dhanowa in San Francisco Bay Area Federal Court, drew substantial media attention when it was filed in January 2021.
The story continued swimming six months later, when the New York Times published results of DNA tests on Subway tuna. The Times found no tuna DNA in the Subway “tuna.”
In a November 2021 filing, Amin claimed that independent DNA tests found chicken, pork and beef in the Subway “tuna” sandwich. Subway tried several times to have the lawsuit thrown out, but a judge ruled in July 2022 that it could continue.
After Amin’s latest request, Subway implied she was lying and said she gave up on the suit after realizing the company would not “simply pay the windfall settlement that they hoped to get by constructing a high-profile shakedown,” Reuters reported.
