Target Good & Gather “Sustainably Caught” Tuna Class Action Lawsuit

By Steve Levine

Published: June 6, 2026

What Is This About?

A class action lawsuit filed against Target Corporation claims the retailer misleads shoppers by labeling certain Good & Gather tuna products as “Sustainably Caught.”

The case is Sue Kim v. Target Corporation, Case No. 2:26-cv-02910, filed March 18, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division.

Plaintiff Sue Kim alleges Target uses a uniform sustainability marketing campaign for its Good & Gather tuna products, including front-label “Sustainably Caught” claims, back-label statements describing the products as “sustainable seafood,” and statements that the tuna is “wild caught using sustainable practices to help protect ocean resources for future generations to enjoy.”

The complaint alleges those claims are false or misleading because, according to the plaintiff, the tuna is sourced using fishing methods that harm marine life and ocean ecosystems. Target has not been found liable, and the court has not decided whether the challenged labels are false or misleading.

Which Good & Gather Tuna Products Are Named?

The complaint defines the challenged “Tuna Products” as several Good & Gather brand products. The listed products are:

• Good & Gather portable pouch Chunk Light Tuna in Water
• Good & Gather portable pouch Lemon Pepper Chunk Light Tuna
• Good & Gather portable pouch Albacore Chunk White Tuna in Water
• Good & Gather portable pouch Sweet and Spicy Chunk Light Tuna
• Good & Gather tinned Solid White Albacore Tuna in Water
• Good & Gather tinned Chunk Light Tuna in Water

The complaint alleges the labels of the different tuna varieties are substantially similar in the sustainability representations made to consumers.

What Does the Lawsuit Claim Target Put on the Labels?

The lawsuit says Target communicates its sustainability message most prominently through a “Sustainably Caught” front-of-label statement on every challenged tuna package.

The complaint alleges that Target reinforces that message with back-label statements describing the products as “sustainable seafood” and claiming they are “wild caught using sustainable practices to help protect ocean resources for future generations to enjoy.”

The lawsuit also alleges the packaging directs consumers to Target’s website to learn more about Target’s Sustainable Seafood Commitment, and that the product labeling includes Marine Stewardship Council-related certification marks.

Why Does the Complaint Challenge “Sustainably Caught”?

The lawsuit alleges reasonable shoppers understand “sustainably caught” seafood to mean that the fishing methods used do not harm the marine ecosystem and instead promote marine health.

According to the complaint, Target’s albacore tuna products state they are “longline caught,” while non-albacore tuna products state they are “purse seine caught.” The plaintiff alleges those methods are not sustainable because they can cause bycatch, overfishing, ghost gear problems, and harm to marine wildlife.

The complaint specifically alleges purse seine fishing can capture non-target marine life within large nets, while longline fishing can use lines with many hooks that catch non-target species. These are the plaintiff’s allegations, not court findings.

What Did the Plaintiff Buy?

The complaint says Sue Kim lives in Cerritos, California and purchased two Good & Gather tuna products from a local Target store in Cerritos on June 28, 2025.

The products identified in the complaint are Good & Gather portable pouch Chunk Light Tuna in Water and Good & Gather portable pouch Albacore Chunk White Tuna in Water. The complaint says Kim paid $0.99 and $1.99 for those products, respectively.

Kim alleges she reviewed the tuna packaging, relied on the sustainability representations, and believed the tuna was caught in a way that would not harm marine ecosystems. She claims she would not have purchased the products, or would not have paid the same price, if she had known the sustainability representations were allegedly untrue or misleading.

Who Would Be Included?

The case is proposed as a class action, but the court has not certified any class.

The complaint proposes a Multi-State Consumer Protection Class covering people who purchased a challenged tuna product in California or in states with similar laws during the applicable period, for personal use and not resale.

The complaint also proposes a California Class covering people who purchased a challenged tuna product in California during the applicable period, for personal use and not resale.

Class definitions can change during litigation. No one is automatically entitled to money unless a class is certified, the case resolves in a way that benefits class members, and a court-approved process is created.

What Legal Claims Are Listed?

The complaint includes claims for alleged violations of state consumer protection statutes on behalf of the proposed multi-state class.

For the proposed California Class, the complaint lists claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law, California False Advertising Law, and California Consumers Legal Remedies Act. The complaint also includes claims for breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment.

The lawsuit alleges Target’s sustainability representations were material to reasonable consumers and that shoppers paid more than they otherwise would have paid because of the challenged labeling.

What Does the Lawsuit Seek?

The complaint asks the court to certify the case as a class action and appoint Sue Kim as class representative.

It also seeks monetary damages, including treble damages and statutory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, costs and expenses, attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and any other relief the court considers proper.

The complaint includes a demand for a jury trial.

Is There a Settlement or Claim Form?

No. The filing reviewed is a class action complaint, not a settlement notice.

There is no certified class, no settlement approval, no payment deadline, and no claim form identified in the complaint. Consumers should not expect a claim form unless the case later reaches a settlement or judgment with a court-approved claims process.

Timeline

June 28, 2025: The complaint alleges Sue Kim purchased two Good & Gather tuna products at a Target store in Cerritos, California.

August 4, 2025: The complaint alleges plaintiff’s counsel mailed Target a notice letter concerning alleged warranty and California Consumers Legal Remedies Act issues.

March 18, 2026: Sue Kim filed the class action complaint against Target Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Case number: Kim v. Target Corporation, No. 2:26-cv-02910.

Why This Case Matters

This case is part of a broader category of consumer lawsuits over environmental and sustainability marketing. The Target complaint focuses on whether shoppers could reasonably understand “Sustainably Caught” and related seafood claims to mean more than Target allegedly delivered. It echoes other recent food-labeling cases, like the Costco Kirkland tortelloni “no preservatives” lawsuit and the Nature Made turmeric “antioxidant” lawsuit, where shoppers allege a front-label claim promised more than the product delivered.

The seafood aisle in particular has drawn repeated scrutiny — from the StarKist tuna price-fixing settlement to the farm-raised salmon false-advertising settlement. Unlike those resolved cases, the Target matter is just beginning.

The court has not decided that question. At this stage, the important point is that the case is newly filed, the allegations are unproven, and there is no claim process for consumers.

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources

• Class Action Complaint, Kim v. Target Corporation, Case No. 2:26-cv-02910
• Target Commitment to Sustainable Seafood

About This Page

OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news and legal information site. We are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. This page summarizes public lawsuit allegations and court filings for informational purposes only. Allegations in a complaint are not findings of fact unless admitted or proven in court.

How Do I Find Class Action Settlements?