CASE NAME: Maiman v. Petco Health and Wellness Company, Inc.
CASE NO. 1:26-cv-01520
JURISDICTION: United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
FILED ON: March 16, 2026
CLASS DEFINITION: All persons in the United States who purchased WholeHearted grain-free dog food products during the applicable statute of limitations period.

SUMMARY:
According to the complaint , Petco Health and Wellness Company, Inc. is alleged to have falsely marketed its WholeHearted grain-free dog food products as providing “complete” and “balanced” nutrition for dogs. The lawsuit claims these representations are misleading because grain-free formulations may lack essential nutrients and are associated with an increased risk of canine dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), a serious heart condition. Plaintiff alleges that consumers were misled into paying a price premium for these products and would not have purchased them, or would have paid less, had they known the alleged risks and nutritional deficiencies.

ALLEGATIONS:
The lawsuit alleges that Petco marketed and sold its WholeHearted grain-free dog food products with claims such as “Complete Nutrition,” “Vitamins & Minerals for Balanced Nutrition,” and “Thoughtfully crafted with maximum benefits.” According to the complaint, these representations led reasonable consumers to believe the products were առողջ and suitable for regular feeding. However, the plaintiff contends that these claims are false and misleading because grain-free dog food may not provide the full range of nutrients necessary for canine health.

The complaint asserts that grain-free diets often replace grains with ingredients such as peas, lentils, and chickpeas, which may contribute to nutritional imbalances. It further alleges that scientific studies and veterinary research have linked such diets to an increased risk of dilated cardiomyopathy in dogs, particularly due to taurine deficiency and other nutritional issues. Despite this, the lawsuit claims Petco failed to disclose any such risks on product packaging or in marketing materials.

The plaintiff, Mina Maiman, alleges she purchased the products relying on Petco’s representations that they were healthier than traditional dog food. According to the complaint, her dog consumed the grain-free products and later developed dilated cardiomyopathy, ultimately resulting in heart failure and death. The lawsuit claims that no warnings were provided regarding potential health risks associated with the products.

Additionally, the complaint alleges that Petco was aware, or should have been aware, of the potential risks linked to grain-free diets through publicly available research, FDA reports, and prior litigation involving similar products. Despite this alleged knowledge, Petco is accused of continuing to market the products as nutritionally superior and beneficial.

The lawsuit further claims that consumers were harmed economically because they paid a premium price for products marketed as higher quality and healthier. According to the complaint, these representations were material to purchasing decisions, particularly for health-conscious pet owners seeking optimal nutrition for their pets.

The plaintiff brings claims under New York consumer protection laws, including deceptive practices and false advertising statutes, as well as common law claims for breach of warranty and failure to warn. The complaint seeks damages, restitution, injunctive relief requiring changes to labeling and marketing, and attorneys’ fees.