Good Lifestyle

AsThe integrity of metro tuna Continue to be the topic # 1 of the Fast Food industry, the original pursuit that started is still without resolution. Now the chain is intervened and asked a federal judge to reject the "frivolous trial" that affected the sales of one of their most popular sandwiches.

Subway said in a court last Friday that the complainants do not offer a single point of factual support to their claims that the tuna of the chain did not contain "100% Listao taken sustainable and yellow tuna" or could have contain tuna "something less than healthy stocks, for example, albacore and Tongol," according toReuters.

The channel also stated that sales of its popular SUB tuna suffered a direct result of these allegations.

"Applicants and much more likely their lawyers, have made these irresponsible claims with a calf indifference not only to the facts, but also to the frank hard work franchisees in the world who have since suffered a decrease in sales of one of their The best-selling products because press reports on prosecution and sensational, and totally without merit, "said the company.

RELATED:Metro tuna is probably a by-product of the mounting chain, says Expert

The trial was originally filed In the US California District Court of Northern California in January by Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin customers. In this, the complainants stated that tuna of the chain, which is announced as a mixture of tuna loyalty in brine and creamy Mayo, is actually everything except. The pursuit continued to say that the sandwich ingredient is actually "a mix of various concunitions that do not constitute tuna, but were mixed together by defendants to imitate the appearance of tuna". The complainants reported having based on their demands on an independent laboratory test conducted on metro tuna samples and accused the company to deceive customers to charge premium prices.

It was then changed in June, and while the claim "no tuna" was no longer part of it, the prosecution has now declared that the product did not contain "100% of the lisjack captured durably and yellow tuna" and called labeling, marketing and the publicity of society ". malicious."

The metro maintained from the beginning that the claims were "unfounded" and the trial constituted a "reckless attack" on their mark. Unfortunately for the chain and its franchisees, the case has caused an unprecedented media attention anda subsequent laboratory test carried out by theNew York Times, which continued to challenge the integrity of the fish as it found "no amplifiable tuna DNA".

On Friday, the channel stated that it wanted applicants and their lawyers "be held responsible" for supporting the complaint "which violates the most basic requirements of federal advocacy standards."

"While the metro offered the complainants and their advice a graceful exit of the morasses they had created by simply licking their claims with prejudices and emit public excuses, they have rather doubled on their destructive behavior with new claims. Also not transferred, "according to society.

For more, discover:

• The metro could not even give his sandwiches for free in the last awakening movement, telly
• The new subway sandwiches have the taste of "like vile than the ancients," said the criticism of food
• The famous spokesman for Subway would never have eaten the food of the chain

And do not forget toSubscribe to our newsletterTo get the latest news from the restaurant delivered directly to your inbox.