Standard Process Lawsuit 2026: Lead Suits, Claims and Status
Quick Answer
- No consumer class action turned up. Standard Process faces lead-warning suits and sues unauthorized resellers.
- No consumer settlement fund exists. A 2025 lead-warning settlement totaled $55,000 in penalties and fees.
- No claim deadline exists. Be wary of any site that lists one.
The Standard Process lawsuit isn’t one case, and no consumer class action turned up in our research. The documented cases are California lead-warning suits and trademark suits the company filed against resellers.
If you bought Standard Process supplements, no claim form or deadline exists. The August 2025 lead-warning settlement lists total payments of $55,000, with no consumer payment line.
This guide sorts each case, flags what’s unverified, and shows you how to check dockets yourself. One surprise: some web guides describe a class action we couldn’t tie to any court record.
The Facts
| Case | No consumer class action found. Standard Process Inc. appears in California Proposition 65 suits and in trademark suits it filed in Wisconsin |
| Status | Most recent verified step: lead-warning settlement dated August 28, 2025 |
| Fund Size | Not yet confirmed. No consumer settlement fund found |
| Est. Per Person | Not yet determined |
| Claim Deadline | None. No claims process has opened |
| Administrator | None appointed |
| Proof Needed | No claim form exists. Keep receipts, labels, and lot numbers |
Is the Standard Process lawsuit real?
Yes, lawsuits involving Standard Process are real, but they aren’t one consumer case. The company appears in two groups of court records.
In California, private groups sued under Proposition 65 over lead and cadmium warnings. In Wisconsin, the company sued online resellers over trademarks. Records back both groups with names and case numbers:
- Environmental Research Center v. Standard Process, Alameda County Superior Court, RG21086370
- Environmental Health Advocates v. Standard Process and Amazon.com, San Francisco Superior Court, CGC-25-626248
- Standard Process v. KDealz, Western District of Wisconsin, 17-cv-909-jdp
We could not verify a consumer class action. The next section covers it.
If you searched this term after a text, ad, or headline, check which case it names. A claim without a case name or number isn’t something you can verify.
Is there a Standard Process class action lawsuit?
We found no Standard Process consumer class action in court records or news. Some web guides describe consolidated complaints covering 2019 to 2025 purchases.
We found no case name, case number, or court behind that claim. One such guide’s own opening admits it found no settlement website, claim form, or deadline.
A Proposition 65 suit works like a neighbor reporting a hazard to the city. Warnings get posted and products may change, but no one mails refunds. A class action works differently.
A real class action leaves a trail:
- A named court and case number
- A defined class and covered products
- A court-approved claims administrator
- A published claim deadline
None of those exist for Standard Process in the sources we checked.
How much money is in the Standard Process lawsuit settlements?
The largest verified figure is $55,000 in total payments from an August 2025 lead-warning settlement. None of it went to consumers, based on the record’s payment lines.
| Item | Amount | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Civil penalty (EHA v. Standard Process) | $6,000 | Settlement dated August 28, 2025 |
| Attorney fees and costs | $49,000 | Same settlement |
| Payment in lieu of penalty | $0 | Same settlement |
| Total payments | $55,000 | Same settlement |
| 2021 ERC settlement amounts | Not yet confirmed | Check the settlement document |
| Consumer payout | Not yet determined | No consumer fund found |
The settlement also required reformulation and warnings. Those are product changes, not payments to buyers.
Consumer payout: Not yet determined. No class, fund, or administrator exists in the records we found.
Key Takeaway: The verified Standard Process settlement money went to penalties and fees, and the record lists no consumer payout.
Does Standard Process owe you money from the lead lawsuits?
No, the lead lawsuits don’t owe you money. Proposition 65 cases seek warnings, reformulation, and civil penalties, not refunds for buyers.
The 2025 settlement lists reformulation, warnings, a $6,000 penalty, and $49,000 in fees. It has no line for a consumer fund. The 2021 settlement states that Standard Process denies all material allegations.
That denial matters. A settlement ends a dispute without proving the original claim.
You may still have a refund path outside any lawsuit. Contact the practitioner or seller who sold you the product and ask about returns.
Reality Check: No court has opened a Standard Process claims website. A site promising a payout for “affected buyers” is guessing or selling something. Never pay a fee to register for money that doesn’t exist.
Who may qualify to file a claim against Standard Process?
No one qualifies for a Standard Process payout today, because no payout program exists. You may qualify later only if a consumer case opens.
A future class case would likely require these:
- You bought covered Standard Process products
- A court or administrator publishes a class definition
- Your purchase dates fall inside the covered period
- You file by the posted deadline
None of those details is confirmed. Guides listing a 2019 to 2025 purchase window aren’t backed by any docket we found.
Individual claims are a separate matter. If a product harmed you, a licensed attorney can explain your state’s time limits. We’re a news publisher, so we report facts and options.
How do you file a claim or complaint about Standard Process products?
You can’t file a settlement claim, but you can report a problem and document it. Follow these steps:
- Keep the product, label, and lot number.
- Save receipts, order emails, or practitioner invoices.
- See a doctor first if you were hurt, and keep records.
- Report health problems to the FDA’s MedWatch program.
- Ask the practitioner or seller about a refund.
- Ask a licensed attorney about time limits if you’re considering a suit.
- Ignore sites that charge a fee to “register” for a payout.
Standard Process sells through practitioners, so your practitioner is often the first stop. Photos of the label help if a lot number is later named in a notice.
How do you check the status of a Standard Process lawsuit?
You check status by searching court dockets and California’s Proposition 65 notice records for the case numbers. Follow these steps:
- Search the Alameda County court for RG21086370.
- Search the San Francisco court for CGC-25-626248.
- Look up California Attorney General notice numbers 2020-02071 and 2024-00488.
- Search Western District of Wisconsin dockets for 17-cv-909-jdp and related cases.
- Treat any site without a case number as unverified.
Public docket sites and legal news services carry filings and rulings. A docket entry shows a filing happened. It doesn’t prove a claim is true.
Key Takeaway: Verify any Standard Process claim by case number, because none of the verified cases offers consumers a payout.
What is the latest news on the Standard Process lawsuit?
The latest verified step is the August 28, 2025 lead-warning settlement. We found no new Standard Process filing in 2026 in the sources we checked.
| Track | Case | Latest verified step |
|---|---|---|
| Lead warning | EHA v. Standard Process and Amazon | Settled August 28, 2025 |
| Lead and cadmium warning | ERC v. Standard Process | Settled June 3, 2021 |
| Trademark | Standard Process v. Scannella, 3:21-cv-00062 | Filed 2021; outcome not confirmed |
| Consumer class action | Alleged by some guides | Not confirmed |
Court records move slowly, and Proposition 65 notices appear on a public list as they’re filed. A quiet docket isn’t proof nothing is coming.
If a headline says “new Standard Process lawsuit,” look for the court and case number. No number means no verification.
Did Standard Process settle the California lead lawsuit?
Yes, Standard Process settled two California lead-warning cases, in 2021 and 2025. Both ended with a settlement, not a trial verdict.
The first case began with a notice on August 13, 2020, from Environmental Research Center. The group filed in January 2021, and the settlement is dated June 3, 2021. It covered two related notices, 2020-02392 and 2020-02650.
The second began with a notice on January 31, 2024, from Environmental Health Advocates. The complaint followed on June 18, 2025, and the settlement is dated August 28, 2025. That’s about ten weeks from complaint to settlement.
The 2021 settlement states that Standard Process denies all material allegations. We found no admission of liability in either record.
What did courts decide in the Standard Process trademark suits?
Courts gave mixed results in the trademark suits, and some outcomes aren’t confirmed. Standard Process is the plaintiff in each case.
| Case | Court | What the record shows |
|---|---|---|
| Total Health Discount | Eastern District of Wisconsin | Amended complaint filed July 6, 2007; summary judgment motions denied on key claims |
| Dr. Scott Banks | Eastern District of Wisconsin | April 18, 2008: reseller of authentic products could use the trademark to advertise, given a prominent disclaimer |
| KDealz | Western District of Wisconsin | Filed December 4, 2017; June 20, 2018 ruling denied dismissal for lack of jurisdiction |
| Antitrend | Western District of Wisconsin | Court denied the defendants’ motion, including an arbitration argument |
| Clement, Levy, Scannella | Western District of Wisconsin | Filed 2017, 2019, and 2021; outcomes not confirmed |
One case, AVC Infinite, has conflicting secondary accounts. Some say default judgment and others say settlement. Check the docket.
What is Proposition 65, and why is Standard Process named?
Proposition 65 is a California law requiring warnings about exposure to listed chemicals. Lead and cadmium are on that list, which is why Standard Process was named.
Private groups can send a 60-day notice to the state. If officials don’t act, those groups may sue. The records show the relief sought: a warning and a civil penalty.
It works like a warning-label law with private enforcers. The groups test products and send notices to companies. Settlements usually change labels or formulas.
A notice alleges a violation. It isn’t a finding that a product is unsafe. Standard Process denied the allegations in the 2021 settlement.
Which Standard Process products were named in the lead lawsuits?
The 2021 settlement names dozens of products, including SP Complete and SP Cleanse. The 2025 case named one snack bar.
From the 2021 document, named products include:
- SP Complete Vanilla, Chocolate, and Dairy Free (lead and cadmium)
- Veg-E Complete Pro Chocolate (lead and cadmium)
- SP Cleanse (lead)
- Whole Food Fiber and Gastro-Fiber (lead)
- Standard Bar High-Protein flavors (lead)
- Calcifood and Calsol (lead)
The 2025 case named the POSSIBLE Snack Bar in Cashew Date Turmeric, citing lead. These are allegations. Standard Process denied them in the 2021 case.
Key Takeaway: The lead suits named specific products, and the allegations ended in settlements without payments to consumers.
Why does Standard Process sue online resellers?
Standard Process sues resellers because it sells only through authorized sellers. A federal judge described it that way in the KDealz ruling.
Counsel sent KDealz a cease-and-desist letter on October 9, 2017, and another on November 16. KDealz kept selling, and the suit followed on December 4, 2017. The claims included trademark infringement, false advertising, and unfair competition.
One complaint says the company set quality controls for its products. Courts haven’t always sided with the company. The Banks ruling allowed resale of authentic goods under a disclaimer.
For you, the takeaway is practical. If you want the manufacturer’s quality controls, buy from your practitioner or a seller you’ve verified.
Who owns Standard Process, and where is it based?
Standard Process Inc. is a privately held, family-owned company based in Palmyra, Wisconsin. Dr. Royal Lee founded it in 1929.
A 2021 magazine profile named Charlie DuBois as president and CEO. It said the DuBois family became the third generation to own the company in 1996. Check current leadership before quoting it.
The company makes whole-food-based supplements. Profiles say it grows many raw materials on a certified organic farm near its headquarters.
Because it’s private, it files no public financial reports. That’s why court records and state notices are your best window into its legal history.
Has Standard Process been recalled?
Standard Process issued a voluntary recall on June 29, 2012. It covered three supplements over potential Salmonella contamination.
The products were Cataplex ACP (0700 and 0750), Cataplex C (1650 and 1655), and Pancreatrophin PMG (6650). All were Lot 114, with best-used-by dates of May 2013.
A routine FDA record inspection found that an ingredient potentially contained the bacteria. The company reported no illnesses. Products were sold through health care professionals.
That recall is old, and it isn’t a lawsuit. We found no newer recall in the sources we checked.
Key Takeaway: The only recall we found is from 2012, and it covered three lots.
Are Standard Process supplements safe to keep taking?
That’s a question for your doctor or pharmacist, because a lawsuit allegation isn’t a safety finding. Standard Process denied the lead and cadmium allegations in the 2021 settlement.
Here’s what you can do:
- Read the label for any California warning language
- Ask your practitioner about your specific products
- Report reactions to the FDA’s MedWatch program
- Keep lot numbers for any product you question
Don’t stop a medication or supplement because of a headline. Talk to the professional who recommended it.
What happens next in the Standard Process cases?
No court date is scheduled in the cases we found:
Not scheduled: Any new Proposition 65 notice or complaint. These appear on California’s public notice list when filed.
Expected, date not confirmed: A consumer class action filing, if one exists. None is verified.
Not scheduled: Confirmed outcomes in older trademark cases that lack a recorded result.
Ongoing: Check dockets for the case numbers above.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a Standard Process class action lawsuit?
No consumer class action turned up in our research.
Some web guides describe one, but we found no court or case number.
No claim form or deadline exists.
Did Standard Process settle a lawsuit over lead?
Yes, it settled two California lead-warning cases.
They are dated June 3, 2021 and August 28, 2025.
Standard Process denied the allegations in the 2021 settlement.
How much was the Standard Process lead settlement?
The 2025 settlement lists total payments of $55,000.
That’s a $6,000 civil penalty and $49,000 in attorney fees and costs.
The 2021 settlement amounts are not yet confirmed.
Can I get money from the Standard Process lawsuit?
No payout is available.
The verified settlements list no consumer payment.
Ignore any site charging a fee to claim money.
Why is Standard Process suing online sellers?
Standard Process sells through authorized resellers.
It sued sellers such as KDealz over trademark and advertising claims.
Courts have given mixed results.
Has Standard Process ever been recalled?
Yes, it recalled three supplements on June 29, 2012.
The cause was potential Salmonella contamination.
We found no newer recall in the sources we checked.
Where is Standard Process based?
Standard Process is based in Palmyra, Wisconsin.
It was founded in 1929 by Dr. Royal Lee.
It’s privately held and family-owned.
If you bought Standard Process supplements, save your labels and receipts. Check any “payout” claim against a case number before you trust it.
The newest verified settlement is dated August 28, 2025, and it lists no consumer payment.
