The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled on a case involving KetoNatural Pet Foods and Hill's Pet Nutrition, affecting the pet food industry and its marketing practices. The court's decision on July 14, 2026, addresses allegations of false advertising under the Lanham Act, with implications for how companies can market their products in a competitive landscape.
KetoNatural Pet Foods, a startup that produces grain-free pet food, filed a class action lawsuit against Hill's Pet Nutrition, a subsidiary of Colgate-Palmolive Co., claiming that Hill's made false statements about grain-free diets being linked to canine heart disease. This case, identified as docket number 24-3185, highlights the ongoing tensions between traditional and non-traditional pet food products and their marketing strategies.
The dispute began when KetoNatural alleged that Hill's, along with veterinarians and non-profit organizations, conspired to disparage grain-free pet food to protect its market share. Hill's is one of the largest pet food companies in the U.S., primarily selling grain-based pet food. As the popularity of grain-free diets increased, Hill's sales began to decline, prompting the company to allegedly launch a campaign to undermine its competitors.
The district court initially dismissed KetoNatural's complaint, ruling that the company failed to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The court found that KetoNatural did not adequately show that Hill's statements constituted commercial speech or that they were literally false. However, the Tenth Circuit found that the district court erred in part, determining that some of Hill's statements could indeed be classified as commercial speech.
The Tenth Circuit's ruling stated, "KetoNatural plausibly alleged that some statements by Hill’s were commercial speech that was false." The court affirmed the dismissal of some claims but reversed the decision regarding others, sending the case back to the lower court for further proceedings. The judges on the panel included Circuit Judges Tymkovich, Phillips, and McHugh.
This ruling is significant for KetoNatural, as it allows the company to continue pursuing its claims against Hill's. The court's decision underscores the importance of accurate marketing practices in the pet food industry, particularly as competition intensifies between traditional and grain-free pet food options.
The impact of this ruling extends beyond the immediate parties involved. It sets a precedent for how false advertising claims are evaluated under the Lanham Act, particularly in cases involving scientific claims about health risks. Companies in the pet food industry and beyond will need to ensure that their marketing materials are not only persuasive but also factually accurate to avoid legal challenges.
Looking ahead, the case could potentially be appealed to a higher court, but for now, it remains in the hands of the lower court for further proceedings. The outcome of this case may influence how companies approach their advertising strategies and the claims they make about their products in the future.