Is Subway’s tuna actually tuna? An amended lawsuit says no

Subway has been fighting claims since January that its tuna isn’t, well, tuna. But a new version of the lawsuit against the fast-food chain is doubling down on the accusations.

Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin, the Californians suing the company, have amended the suit, saying they had 20 samples of the chain’s tuna tested—and 19 had no detectable tuna DNA sequences, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Subway has denied the claims and noted the amended suit came only after a prior complaint was dismissed by the judge.

“The fact remains that Subway tuna is real and strictly regulated by the [Food and Drug Administration] in the U.S., and other government entities around the world,” Subway told the Journal.

Dhanowa and Amin, though, allege all 20 samples of the tuna they tested had chicken DNA, while 11 had pork DNA and seven had cattle DNA. They claim to have had the testing done at the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of California, Los Angeles.

This isn’t the first time Subway has had to defend its sandwich meat. In 2017, it sued the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (CBC) following a TV exposé which claimed that 50% of the chain’s chicken was made from soybeans.

The chain has struggled in recent years, closing 500 locations in 2018, and during the pandemic it was reportedly one of several firms that told landlords it would withhold or slash rent payments in an effort to help franchises mitigate the COVID-19 fallout.

More must-read retail coverage from Fortune:

Subscribe to Fortune Daily to get essential business stories straight to your inbox each morning.

Read More

Great ResignationInflationSupply ChainsLeadership