Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. None of the defendants has been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
A proposed class action filed June 22, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California (Sacramento) accuses some of the largest fuel retailers operating in California — along with the maker of the Kalibrate Fuel Pricing software — of using a shared artificial-intelligence pricing tool to coordinate and inflate gas prices. The case is captioned Casciani et al. v. Knowledge Support Systems, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:26-cv-02211-CSK (initially docketed under intake number 2:26-at-01044). The three named plaintiffs are California drivers from Chula Vista, Homeland and Marysville who say they paid artificially high prices at the pump.The complaint alleges that competing retailers fed their pricing into a common algorithm and that the software recommended higher prices while discouraging stations from undercutting nearby competitors. Plaintiffs frame this as a modern, algorithm-driven form of price coordination. The defendants have not yet responded in court, and these allegations have not been tested or proven.
Who Was Sued
According to the complaint, the central defendant is Knowledge Support Systems, Inc., the company behind the Kalibrate Fuel Pricing tool. The complaint also names a group of retailers that together are alleged to operate more than 1,700 California gas stations, including:- Marathon Petroleum Corporation and Marathon Petroleum Company LP
- 7-Eleven, Inc. and Speedway LLC
- EG America LLC
- BP Products North America Inc.
- TravelCenters of America Inc., TA Operating LLC and TA Franchise Systems LLC
- Walmart Inc. and Sam's West, Inc. (doing business as Sam's Club)
- Circle K Stores Inc. and TMC Franchise Corporation
- Albertsons Companies, Inc.
- Doe Corporations 1–10
Naming a company as a defendant is not evidence of wrongdoing. As of publication, the defendants had not filed responses, and several companies contacted by news outlets did not provide comment.
How the Kalibrate Tool Allegedly Worked
Kalibrate Fuel Pricing is marketed as software that helps fuel retailers set prices. The complaint alleges that, in practice, competing retailers using the same tool effectively shared competitively sensitive information and received recommendations that pushed prices upward rather than toward competition. Plaintiffs allege the tool discouraged stations from lowering prices below rivals, characterizing such a move as triggering a "downward spiral," and that it even includes a "restoration" feature that lets stations in a market raise prices together. Given California's fuel volume, the complaint alleges that even a one-cent-per-gallon increase drains about $134 million a year from California drivers, and characterizes the total overcharge from the alleged scheme as a multi-billion-dollar drain on the state's economy.These are characterizations drawn from the complaint. Kalibrate's developer and the retailer defendants have not admitted any of these allegations, and a court has not ruled on whether the software's use violated any law.
The Law Behind the Case
The complaint brings two counts. Count One alleges a per se violation of California's Cartwright Act — the state's primary antitrust law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 16720, 16729) — as amended by Assembly Bill 325, which took effect January 1, 2026. AB 325 makes explicit that using or distributing a "common pricing algorithm" as part of an unlawful trust or conspiracy violates the Cartwright Act, and California Attorney General Rob Bonta has said it "simply makes it clear that using common pricing algorithms to fix prices among competitors is just as illegal as traditional price fixing." Count Two alleges unlawful and unfair business practices under California's Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200). Legal commentators have described this case as one of the first major tests of AB 325.Plaintiffs seek to represent all persons and entities who purchased gasoline at a Gas Station Defendant's California station using Kalibrate Fuel Pricing from June 22, 2022 to the present. The complaint asks for compensatory and treble (triple) damages, restitution and disgorgement, a permanent injunction, and attorneys' fees, and demands a jury trial. The proposed class has not been certified.
What Happens Next
At this stage there is nothing for consumers to file. The defendants will have an opportunity to respond, likely with motions to dismiss, and the court will eventually decide whether the case can proceed as a class action. Antitrust class actions of this kind typically take years, and many are narrowed or dismissed before any recovery. If the case ever reaches a settlement or judgment with payments to consumers, a claims process and deadline would be announced then — we will update this page if that happens.Read the Complaint
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a settlement or claim form yet?
No. This is a newly filed complaint. No class has been certified, no defendant has been found liable, and there is nothing to claim at this time.
Who is being sued?
The complaint names Knowledge Support Systems, Inc. (the maker of the Kalibrate Fuel Pricing tool) along with retailers including Marathon Petroleum, 7-Eleven, Speedway, EG America, BP Products North America, TravelCenters of America, Walmart, Sam's Club, Circle K and Albertsons. All allegations are unproven.
What does the lawsuit allege the tool did?
Plaintiffs allege the retailers used a shared algorithmic tool that recommended higher prices and discouraged undercutting competitors, which they characterize as a price-coordination scheme. The defendants have not responded, and the allegations remain unproven.
Who would the proposed class cover?
As described in the complaint, anyone who bought gasoline at a defendant's California station using Kalibrate Fuel Pricing from June 22, 2022 to the present. The class is proposed only and has not been certified by the court.
What law does the complaint rely on?
California's Cartwright Act as amended by AB 325, which took effect January 1, 2026 and addresses shared pricing algorithms among competitors. The case is widely described as one of the first tests of that amendment.
Sources
- Class action complaint — Casciani v. Knowledge Support Systems (E.D. Cal.)
- Reuters — BP, Marathon, 7-Eleven, Walmart sued over AI gas pricing
- Associated Press — AI helping gas stations collude, lawsuit says
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
