A California federal judge said Thursday he will grant final approval to a $10 million settlement resolving claims that Nabisco and parent company Mondelez falsely advertised Wheat Thins as containing “100% Whole Grain,” a label plaintiffs argued was misleading due to the inclusion of cornstarch.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria praised the outcome but took notable aim at the defendants’ prior litigation conduct — a saga he said forced plaintiffs’ lawyers to push the case nearly to the brink of trial.

Judge: Case Fought 'Almost to the Finish Line'

Speaking via Zoom, Judge Chhabria called it “pretty unusual” for him to grant attorneys a fee award above the typical 25% benchmark. But in this case, he said the requested one-third share of the settlement was justified.

“Plaintiffs’ counsel had to go very far, almost to the finish line, really, before getting this settlement,” he said.

The lawsuit, filed in 2022, argued the “100% WHOLE GRAIN” label duped shoppers, including lead plaintiff David Wallenstein, who said he regularly purchased Wheat Thins near his Northern California home and would not have paid the same price had he known the crackers weren’t exclusively whole grain.

Litigation Stretched by ‘Unreasonable Positions’

Over the course of the two-year fight, plaintiffs’ attorneys secured class certification, defeated Nabisco’s and Mondelez’s failed Ninth Circuit bid to appeal the certification order, and opposed the companies’ motion for summary judgment.

Days before the scheduled hearing on that motion — and mere months before trial — the parties announced a deal in principle and asked the court to halt proceedings.

Judge Chhabria remarked that defendants' conduct contributed heavily to the drawn-out litigation.

“There was a lot of really unnecessary expense that the plaintiffs needed to undertake as a result of a number of unreasonable positions taken by the defendants,” he said, noting the critique applied to prior counsel, not current attorneys at Crowell & Moring LLP.

Court filings show Baker McKenzie previously represented Nabisco and Mondelez. Crowell took over representation at the end of 2024.

What the Settlement Provides

Beyond the $10 million fund, the companies agreed to stop using the phrase “100% WHOLE GRAIN” without qualifiers, a form of injunctive relief the judge described as another win for consumers.

“The settlement is a good settlement … and I will approve it all,” he said.

No class members objected or opted out, according to the motion for final approval.

Who’s Included in the Class?

• Individuals 18+ in the U.S. and its territories

• Who purchased Wheat Thins labeled “100% WHOLE GRAIN”

• Between Oct. 13, 2018, and May 9, 2025

Compensation

• With proof of purchase: up to $20 per household

• Without proof: $4.50 per household

More than 111,000 valid claims have been submitted to date, including 2,412 with proof of purchase. If claims exceed available funds, payments will be reduced pro rata.

Claims and Defenses

The lawsuit alleged violations of:

• The California Consumer Legal Remedies Act

• New York consumer protection laws

• False advertising statutes

• Breach of express warranty

Mondelez and Nabisco maintained throughout the case that plaintiffs failed to show a reasonable consumer would be misled by the labeling.

Counsel

• Plaintiffs & Class: Dave Fox, Joanna Fox, and Courtney Vasquez, Fox Law APC

• Nabisco & Mondelez: Jennifer S. Romano and Jason Stiehl, Crowell & Moring LLP