Shoppers who bought Target’s Good & Gather or Market Pantry boxed macaroni and cheese may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Target Corporation labeled the products as free of artificial preservatives even though they contain citric acid, lactic acid powder and/or sodium phosphate. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Target Corporation has not 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 October 22, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York accuses Target Corporation of selling store-brand boxed macaroni and cheese with front-of-box claims of “No Artificial Preservatives” or “NO Artificial Flavors, Preservatives, or Synthetic Colors” while the products contain citric acid, lactic acid powder and/or sodium phosphate. The complaint, Vaughan v. Target Corporation, No. 7:26-cv-09281, calls all three ingredients “known preservatives” and covers eight varieties sold under Target’s Market Pantry and Good & Gather brands.The named plaintiff, a Westchester County, New York resident, says she bought the products for about three years, ending around fall 2025, mostly the Good & Gather White Cheddar and Shells & White Cheddar varieties, and relied on the preservative claims when she did. She is represented by Reese LLP. The case is at its first stage: Target has not been found liable for anything, and no class has been certified.
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.
Which Products Are Named
The complaint lists eight Target-brand boxed macaroni and cheese products:- Market Pantry Macaroni & Cheese
- Market Pantry Macaroni & Cheese Spirals
- Market Pantry Deluxe Shells Macaroni & Cheese
- Good & Gather White Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese
- Good & Gather Shells & Aged Cheddar Macaroni and Cheese
- Good & Gather Shells & White Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese
- Good & Gather Elbows & Classic Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese
- Good & Gather Macaroni & Cheese
The complaint describes Market Pantry and Good & Gather as part of Target’s portfolio of owned brands, and calls Good & Gather the company’s higher-quality line. It treats the eight products as substantially similar because each carries a front-label preservative claim and each contains at least one of the three ingredients it challenges.
What the Labels Say and What the Complaint Alleges
According to the complaint, the boxes carry one of several front-panel statements: “No Artificial Preservatives,” “NO Artificial Flavors, Preservatives, or Synthetic Colors,” or, on two Good & Gather products, “No Preservatives” alongside “Made with Organic Pasta.” The complaint says the statements often appear in bold type or against a contrasting background.The complaint alleges that one pictured product contains citric acid, lactic acid powder and sodium phosphate, and that the other products pictured contain lactic acid powder and sodium phosphate. It describes each ingredient as a preservative:
- Citric acid: the complaint says it raises acidity enough to make it harder for bacteria and mold to survive, and alleges it works as a preservative at concentrations as low as 0.03%, below the roughly 0.04% level at which its sour taste is noticed.
- Lactic acid powder: the complaint points to the FDA’s listing of lactic acid as having an “antimicrobial agent” technical effect in food, and alleges it also inhibits microbes at very low levels.
- Sodium phosphate: the complaint says it is used to control pH and inhibit spoilage organisms, which it argues is a preservative function.
The complaint also takes aim at the brand name itself, alleging that “Good & Gather” suggests simple, natural, farm-to-table ingredients and reinforces the impression that the boxes contain no preservatives. It alleges shoppers paid more, or bought products they otherwise would not have, because of the labels.
The Preservative Question
Citric acid, lactic acid and sodium phosphates are common food ingredients that can also add tartness or control acidity. The question the complaint puts to the court is whether a shopper reading “no artificial preservatives” on the box would be misled by their presence.The complaint builds its answer on several sources. It cites the FDA’s regulatory definition of a chemical preservative as any chemical that, added to food, tends to prevent or slow its deterioration, and a 2010 FDA warning letter to Chiquita that described citric acid as a chemical preservative in a fruit snack. It also anticipates a defense that citric acid is there for flavor, arguing that the ingredient acts as a preservative before it can be tasted.
On the word “artificial,” the complaint acknowledges that citric acid occurs naturally in citrus fruit but alleges that about 99% of the citric acid in use today is manufactured by fermenting sugar with the fungus Aspergillus niger. It argues that ordinary shoppers do not draw a technical line between artificial and naturally derived preservatives, and read the label to mean no preservatives at all.
In its coverage of the suit, The Independent noted that the FDA groups citric acid and lactic acid with ingredients that regulate acidity and can help preserve food, without necessarily classifying them as artificial preservatives. No court has ruled on any of these arguments in this case.
Who the Proposed Classes Would Cover
The complaint asks the court to certify two classes:- Nationwide Class: all persons who bought the products in the United States within the applicable statute of limitations period.
- New York Class: all persons who bought the products in New York within the applicable statute of limitations period.
Target and its affiliates, officers and directors, people who bought for resale, people asserting personal injury claims, and the assigned judge and the judge’s immediate family are excluded. These are proposed definitions only; a court decides later whether any class is certified and on what terms.
Claims and Relief Sought
The complaint pleads three counts. The first two are brought for the New York Class under New York’s consumer protection statutes: General Business Law § 349, which prohibits deceptive business practices, and General Business Law § 350, which prohibits false advertising, including labeling. The third, unjust enrichment, is brought for both the nationwide and New York classes. Federal jurisdiction rests on the Class Action Fairness Act; the complaint alleges more than $5 million is in controversy.The complaint asks the court to certify the classes, require Target to pay for notice to class members, order restitution and disgorgement of profits, and award actual, statutory and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, and interest. Under the § 349 count it says damages will be “not less than $50.00”; that figure is a pleading demand, not an amount anyone has been awarded. The plaintiff demands a jury trial.
What Happens Next
No response from Target to the complaint had been located as of November 8, 2026, and The Independent reported that it had contacted the company for comment without a reported reply. Target will have the opportunity to respond, typically by answering the complaint or moving to dismiss it. In labeling cases like this one, a motion to dismiss often argues that a reasonable consumer would not be misled by the label; whether this case survives that stage, reaches class certification, settles or is dismissed is not yet known.There is no settlement, no claim form and no deadline. If the case is later resolved with a settlement for buyers, a court-approved notice and claim process would follow.
Questions
Is there any money available from the Target mac and cheese lawsuit?
No money is available. The case is at the complaint stage: no class has been certified, no settlement has been reached and no court has ruled on the allegations, so there is no claim form. Any payment to buyers would depend on a future settlement or judgment.
Which Target macaroni and cheese products does the lawsuit name?
The complaint names eight products: Market Pantry Macaroni & Cheese, Market Pantry Macaroni & Cheese Spirals, Market Pantry Deluxe Shells Macaroni & Cheese, Good & Gather White Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese, Good & Gather Shells & Aged Cheddar Macaroni and Cheese, Good & Gather Shells & White Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese, Good & Gather Elbows & Classic Cheddar Macaroni & Cheese, and Good & Gather Macaroni & Cheese.
Is citric acid a preservative?
That is one of the disputed questions in the case. The complaint relies on the FDA’s definition of a chemical preservative as any chemical that tends to prevent or slow a food’s deterioration, and on a 2010 FDA warning letter that called citric acid a preservative in a fruit snack. Citric acid also adds tartness and controls acidity, and The Independent noted that the FDA groups citric acid and lactic acid with acidity regulators that can help preserve food without necessarily treating them as artificial preservatives. The court has not decided the question.
Why does the complaint say “no artificial preservatives” is misleading if citric acid occurs naturally?
The complaint acknowledges that citric acid occurs naturally in citrus fruit but alleges that about 99% of citric acid today is manufactured through industrial fermentation with the fungus Aspergillus niger. It also argues that ordinary shoppers do not draw a technical line between artificial and naturally derived preservatives, and read “no artificial preservatives” to mean no preservatives at all. These are the plaintiff’s allegations; Target has not had the chance to contest them in court.
Has Target responded to the mac and cheese lawsuit?
No response from Target to the complaint had been located as of November 8, 2026. The Independent reported that it contacted Target for comment, and no statement from the company was reported.
Sources
- Class action complaint, Vaughan v. Target Corporation, No. 7:26-cv-09281 (S.D.N.Y. filed Oct. 22, 2026) (PDF)
- The Independent (via Yahoo News): Target accused of having preservatives in mac-and-cheese despite box’s claim
