Traeger Pellet Grills agreed to a $1.5 million class action settlement over claims that certain Traeger-branded wood pellet bags were marketed as containing specific wood types or as “100% hardwood” when, according to the lawsuit, they did not. Wood pellets are central to pellet-grill cooking because the labeled wood blend is tied to perceived quality, heat performance, and smoke flavor—so consumers often pay more for pellets they believe are made from the advertised hardwoods. The case covers purchases made after Oct. 1, 2015 in California and Utah, and it reflects how much modern food-and-fuel branding depends on precise ingredient-style representations even when the product is used as a cooking fuel rather than eaten directly. The lawsuit was filed on the theory that these marketing statements could mislead reasonable shoppers and cause them to pay a premium based on wood composition claims that weren’t accurate, invoking state consumer-protection statutes including Utah’s Consumer Sales Practices Act and California’s UCL, FAL, and CLRA. Traeger denied wrongdoing but settled to avoid the expense and uncertainty of continued litigation, with relief structured as $3 “tear-off” coupons distributed in participating retail settings (rather than requiring consumers to submit proof of purchase). More broadly, the settlement fits a familiar pattern in “ingredient/made-from” labeling disputes—seen across foods, supplements, and other consumer goods—where plaintiffs challenge absolute terms like “100%,” regulators and courts evaluate whether claims are materially misleading, and companies face pressure to tighten substantiation, supply-chain controls, and advertising language to align with state false-advertising and unfair-competition rules.