David Protein Faces Antitrust Lawsuit Following Epogee Acquisition

Days after announcing its acquisition of Epogee, a food technology firm known for a groundbreaking fat replacer utilized in David protein bars called EPG, David Protein has found itself embroiled in a lawsuit. The suit has been initiated by several food companies claiming they have been denied access to the crucial ingredient.

The lawsuit, filed in New York, names David cofounder Peter Rahal, Linus Technology (operating as David Protein), and Epogee as defendants. The plaintiffs—OWN Your Hunger, Lighten Up Foods, and Defiant Foods—accuse them of violating federal antitrust laws and New York’s Donnelly Act through what they characterize as “secretive and collusive conduct” during Epogee’s acquisition.

Allegations of Market Manipulation

The plaintiffs allege that after acquiring Epogee, David Protein utilized its newfound control over EPG to deliberately exclude competitors and create an artificial monopoly. They detail substantial investments made by multiple food manufacturers in research and development, marketing, and product development that relied heavily on access to EPG, which mimics the properties of fat but significantly reduces calorie content.

“These brands fundamentally restructured their entire business models around EPG as their core competitive advantage, making access to EPG essential for their survival,” states the complaint.

Supply Shortages and Operational Disruptions

The complaint reveals that as of March, Epogee began reporting shortages of certain EPG types. Although they initially promised availability by May, communication became increasingly vague. On May 29, Epogee informed clients that it would cease accepting new orders and commence winding down existing accounts following its acquisition by David.

Further inquiries revealed that David had stockpiled at least two years’ worth of EPG supply, effectively barring competitors from accessing the ingredient. This strategic maneuver allegedly created favorable market conditions for monopolization.

Impact on Businesses

The plaintiffs claim to have experienced substantial operational disruptions and lost sales since EPG became unavailable. They assert that the defendants’ actions constitute a deliberate bait-and-switch scheme that undermined the businesses that had significantly contributed to EPG’s market success.

Furthermore, the complaint emphasizes that at least five other food manufacturing companies are either planning or have initiated layoffs, product discontinuations, or closures due to unavailability of EPG.

Plaintiffs Seek Legal Recourse

The plaintiffs are asking the court for a temporary restraining order to prevent David from limiting access to EPG for existing customers and qualified food manufacturers who previously relied on it.

Ruz Safai, founder of OWN Your Hunger, expressed the significance of EPG in their product formulations: “EPG was the cornerstone of our strategy; it allowed us to deliver indulgent products without compromise.” He lamented that David’s decision to cut off supply is not just anti-competitive but anti-innovation.

Implications for Innovators

Other plaintiffs also voiced similar concerns. Blake Sanburg from Lighten Up Foods mentioned his frustrations after investing extensively in developing a chicken dipping sauce with EPG only to be excluded from accessing it. “This unexpected development has jeopardized my product’s future, built around the unique properties of EPG,” he lamented.

Understanding EPG

EPG, or esterified propoxylated glycerol, is produced by splitting plant-based oils such as canola into glycerin and fatty acids and then reforming them with a food-grade link. Its unique properties allow it to function like fat while containing significantly fewer calories—just 0.7 calories per gram compared to 9 calories for traditional fat. This appealed to David, aiming to lower fat and carbohydrate percentages in its protein bars.

Peter Rahal stated, “Acquiring Epogee ensures we have enough EPG to support our business growth and addresses varying consumer needs across different populations.”

Note: The case is titled OWN Your Hunger, Lighten Up Foods, and Defiant Foods vs Linus Technology, Epogee, and Peter Rahal, filed in the Southern District of New York on June 2, 2025. Case Number: 1:25-cv-04544.