McDonald’s is facing a proposed class action lawsuit that claims the company misled customers about the meat in its McRib sandwich. The suit was filed in December 2025 in federal court in Illinois by four consumers. They argue that the sandwich’s name, ridged patty shape, marketing, limited availability, and higher price lead people to believe it contains actual pork rib meat. A federal judge recently allowed key parts of the case to move forward after McDonald’s asked for dismissal. The company denies the claims and says the sandwich contains 100 percent pork.
Lawsuit claims patty shape suggests rib meat
The plaintiffs say McDonald’s deliberately molds the boneless pork patty with ridges so it looks like a rack of ribs. They argue this design, combined with the name “McRib,” creates the impression that the sandwich includes the more expensive rib cut. The complaint states that the patty does not contain any pork rib meat. Instead, it alleges the product is made from other pork components. The suit seeks damages and changes to how the sandwich is advertised.
Plaintiffs allege lower-grade pork is used
According to the complaint, the McRib patty is made from ground portions of lower-grade pork products such as shoulder, heart, tripe, or stomach. The plaintiffs contend this is different from the premium rib meat consumers expect based on the name and appearance. McDonald’s has disputed these specific ingredient claims in public statements about the case.
Judge allows core claims to proceed
On October 30, 2026, U.S. District Judge April Perry in Chicago allowed consumer deception, fraud, and unjust enrichment claims to proceed while dismissing other counts. Perry wrote that it was too early to accept McDonald’s argument that no reasonable consumer would expect rib meat. She noted that the company’s website describes the sandwich as containing pork without specifying rib meat. The ruling does not decide the final outcome of the case.
McDonald’s says claims distort the facts
McDonald’s has specifically denied using heart, tripe, or scalded stomach in the patty. McDonald’s has also said it has always been transparent about the ingredients, which are listed as seasoned boneless pork. The company has until later in November to file its formal response to the complaint.
Surveys cited by plaintiffs show consumer expectations
The plaintiffs submitted survey results as part of their case. One survey found that 72 percent of respondents expected the McRib to contain rib meat. Another found that 67 percent considered rib meat important or very important when deciding whether to buy the sandwich. Judge Perry referenced these findings when deciding that the claims were plausible enough to proceed.
McRib has been a limited-time item since 1981
McDonald’s first introduced the McRib in 1981 and has offered it periodically as a limited-time sandwich. The company has used the item’s temporary availability as part of its marketing. Plaintiffs argue that this scarcity, along with the name and shape, supports the idea that the product is presented as a premium option.
Website description mentions pork but not ribs
McDonald’s website describes the McRib as made with a McRib Pork Patty and lists the meat as seasoned boneless pork. It does not state that the sandwich contains rib meat. Judge Perry noted that reasonable consumers need not research fast-food ingredients.
Case seeks damages and advertising changes
The four named plaintiffs are seeking to represent a broader class of consumers who bought the McRib. They claim they paid more than they would have if they had known the sandwich did not contain rib meat. The suit asks for damages and for McDonald’s to change how it advertises and labels the product. The case remains in its early stages in the Northern District of Illinois.
Ruling focuses on what consumers could reasonably expect
Judge Perry wrote that the plaintiffs’ understanding of the name “McRib” is not unreasonable or fanciful. She said the rib-like shape highlighted in advertising could support a claim that the company intended to create a certain impression, though more proof would be needed. The court found that McDonald’s naming and marketing, paired with a nonspecific “pork” description, could amount to a half-truth that requires further disclosure.
Next steps include the company’s formal response
McDonald’s must respond to the complaint by November 20, 2026. Following the judge’s refusal to dismiss the case, McDonald’s must defend the remaining claims. The lawsuit will now proceed through litigation, including potential discovery and motions, with both sides presenting further arguments and evidence.
