McDonald's faces a lawsuit claiming the McRib isn't actually ribs

The McRib is back again — just, this time, in a federal courtroom.

Just before Christmas, a group of consumers (Peter Le, Charles Lynch, Dorien Baker, and Darrick Wilson) filed a proposed federal class-action lawsuit against McDonald’s in Chicago, arguing that the fast-food giant misled customers by selling a sandwich called the McRib… that contains no rib meat at all. The case, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seeks nationwide class status and damages for buyers who say they paid a premium for something the name itself promised — and the product never delivered.

At the center of the complaint is the McRib’s carefully engineered ambiguity. The sandwich is boneless, molded into the shape of a rack of ribs, drenched in barbecue sauce, and marketed as a limited-time event. The plaintiffs are arguing that the combination would lead a “reasonable consumer” to believe the product contains at least some actual pork rib meat. It does not. Instead, the filing says, the patty is made from “lower-grade” cuts and “pork shoulder, heart, tripe, and scalded stomach.”

McDonald’s has never pretended the McRib contains bones. It describes the sandwich as “boneless pork,” a phrase doing a lot of quiet, legal work in the background. The company seems to think the McRib’s role has always been clear: It’s ribs for people who don’t really want bone-in ribs, engineered for speed, consistency, and sauce coverage.

In a statement to NBC Chicago, McDonald’s said: “This lawsuit distorts the facts and many of the claims are inaccurate. Food quality and safety are at the heart of everything we do — that’s why we’re committed to using real, quality ingredients across our entire menu. Our fan-favorite McRib sandwich is made with 100% pork sourced from farmers and suppliers across the U.S. We’ve always been transparent about our ingredients so guests can make the right choice for them.”

But that framing may sidestep the lawsuit’s actual pressure point. The plaintiffs aren’t alleging unsafe food or undisclosed ingredients. They’re alleging that the McRib’s name, shape, and marketing operate as a promise — one strong enough to justify a higher price and distinct from McDonald’s everyday menu items.

The plaintiffs cite McRib prices that, in some markets, rival or exceed core staples such as the Big Mac, and argue that rib meat is widely understood as a premium cut. The lawsuit cites McRib pricing from its December 2024 run, alleging an average price of $5.63 nationally and highs up to $7.89 in some locations, compared with a $5.29 average price for a Big Mac in the same period.

The alleged injury, then, isn’t just nutritional. It’s also financial — and psychological. Plaintiffs say they paid more because they thought they were buying ribs, or at least something closer to ribs than a generic pork patty. The case also takes aim at the McRib’s scarcity mystique. By reappearing briefly and unpredictably, the sandwich has trained customers to act quickly. The lawsuit argues that this urgency compounds the confusion, encouraging impulse purchases before anyone slows down to parse what “McRib” legally guarantees — and what the sandwich meat actually contains.

The plaintiffs are seeking class-action status on behalf of U.S. purchasers who bought a McRib in the four years before the complaint was filed, plus state-specific subclasses for California, New York, Illinois, and Washington, D.C., with slightly different lookback periods. The complaint asks for damages, restitution, and injunctive relief aimed at future marketing. 

The McRib’s pressed-meat geometry exists to signal “ribs” without the mess, the bones, or the variability. Now that same design is Exhibit A — in the allegation that McDonald’s crossed from playful approximation into actionable suggestion. Now a judge will decide: When a menu item is engineered to look like ribs and is named like ribs, how much rib does a “reasonable consumer” get to expect?