ZOA Energy 3M Settlement Over 0 Preservatives Labeling and False Advertising Claims

A proposed $3 million class action settlement targets ZOA Energy drinks marketed with a bold “0 Preservatives” claim, an especially influential message in the crowded U.S. energy-drink aisle where “clean label” cues can sway buyers looking for simpler ingredient lists. Plaintiffs allege the labeling was misleading because the products contain citric acid and ascorbic acid—ingredients many consumers recognize as used to protect flavor, color, or shelf life—while ZOA (a celebrity-backed brand co-founded by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) denies wrongdoing and says its marketing was truthful and compliant. The settlement covers U.S. residents who bought “0 Preservatives” labeled ZOA drinks for personal use between March 1, 2021 and November 21, 2025, with claims due February 20, 2026 and a per-household recovery structured at $1 per unit up to $10 without proof or up to $150 with proof, subject to pro rata reductions if claims exceed the fund. The lawsuit was filed under consumer-protection and false-advertising theories, arguing that “0 Preservatives” can reasonably be interpreted by shoppers to mean no preservative-type ingredients are present, not merely that none are added “for preservation” in the manufacturer’s view. Its significance is less about a court finding (the case is settling without an admission and before a final merits ruling) and more about how companies define and substantiate front-of-can “free-from” claims—language that can create liability when consumers believe it conveys an absolute promise. The dispute fits a broader pattern seen across food and beverage litigation over terms like “natural,” “no artificial preservatives,” and other label shorthand where ingredients that also function as preservatives (or are perceived that way) complicate marketing, and it sits within an industry shaped by FDA labeling rules and Federal Trade Commission advertising standards that require claims to be truthful, not misleading, and supported—leaving brands to navigate the gray area between an ingredient’s technical purpose, its common consumer understanding, and the impression created by prominent “0” claims on the package.