KDP multidistrict antitrust plaintiffs lose class status, appeal filed

Rhea-AI Filing Summary

Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. reports that the court overseeing the In re: Keurig Green Mountain Single-Serve Coffee Antitrust Litigation in the Southern District of New York has denied the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class certification. The plaintiffs had sought to pursue more than $3 billion in classwide monetary damages, but the court found they did not meet the federal requirements to proceed on a class basis.

The direct purchaser plaintiffs have petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to appeal the class certification denial. Keurig Dr Pepper states that it intends to continue vigorously defending the appeal and the remaining lawsuits in this multidistrict antitrust litigation.

Insights

Litigation and risk analyst

Key antitrust class action bid was denied, but an appeal is underway.

The update centers on multidistrict antitrust litigation involving Keurig Dr Pepper Inc. and direct purchaser plaintiffs who had alleged more than $3,000,000,000 of classwide monetary damages. The federal court in the Southern District of New York denied the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, finding they did not satisfy the requirements to proceed on a class basis. This is a procedural outcome that limits, for now, the ability of those plaintiffs to pursue claims on behalf of a broad class.

The plaintiffs have responded by petitioning the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to review the class certification denial. The company states it intends to continue vigorously defending both the appeal and the remaining lawsuits within the multidistrict litigation. The ultimate financial impact depends on future court decisions at both the appellate and trial levels, which are not detailed in this disclosure.

8-K Event Classification

Item 8.01 — Other Events

1 item

Item 8.01 Other Events Other

Voluntary disclosure of events the company deems important to shareholders but not covered by other items.

Understanding 8-K Material Events →

0001418135FALSE00014181352025-11-212025-11-21

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 8-K

CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): November 21, 2025

Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

001-33829

98-0517725

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)

(Commission File Number)

(IRS Employer Identification No.)

53 South Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

877-208-9991

(Registrant’s telephone number including area code)

Not Applicable

(Former name or former address if changed since last report)

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions (see General Instruction A.2. below):

☐     Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)

☐     Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)

☐     Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))

☐     Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-14(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-14(c))

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b-2 of this chapter).

Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class

Trading Symbol

Name of each exchange on which registered

Common stock

KDP

The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

Item 8.01. Other Events.

The court overseeing In re: Keurig Green Mountain Single-Serve Coffee Antitrust Litigation (the “Multidistrict Antitrust Litigation”), currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”), has denied the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, finding that the plaintiffs did not meet the federal requirements to pursue their case on a classwide basis. The direct purchaser plaintiffs had claimed more than $3 billion of classwide monetary damages. The direct purchaser plaintiffs have filed a petition with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, seeking to appeal the SDNY court’s decision. See Note 15 to Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.’s (the “Company”) Form 10-Q filed on October 28, 2025 for further information related to this litigation.

The Company intends to continue vigorously defending the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ appeal and the remaining lawsuits in the Multidistrict Antitrust Litigation.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly authorized.

KEURIG DR PEPPER INC.

Dated: November 21, 2025

By:

/s/ Anthony Shoemaker

Name:

Anthony Shoemaker

Title:

Chief Legal Officer, General Counsel and Secretary

FAQ

What litigation update did Keurig Dr Pepper (KDP) disclose?

Keurig Dr Pepper reported that the court overseeing the In re: Keurig Green Mountain Single-Serve Coffee Antitrust Litigation denied the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.

How large were the damages the direct purchaser plaintiffs sought in the KDP antitrust case?

The direct purchaser plaintiffs had claimed more than $3 billion in alleged classwide monetary damages in the multidistrict antitrust litigation.

Which court is handling the Keurig Green Mountain antitrust multidistrict litigation?

The multidistrict antitrust litigation is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Have the plaintiffs appealed the denial of class certification against Keurig Dr Pepper?

Yes. The direct purchaser plaintiffs have filed a petition with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit seeking to appeal the class certification denial.

How does Keurig Dr Pepper plan to respond to the ongoing antitrust litigation?

Keurig Dr Pepper states that it intends to continue vigorously defending the direct purchaser plaintiffs’ appeal and the remaining lawsuits in the multidistrict antitrust litigation.

Where can investors find more details on Keurig Dr Pepper’s antitrust litigation?

Additional information is referenced in Note 15 to Keurig Dr Pepper Inc.’s Form 10-Q filed on October 28, 2025.