Subscription / ROSCA
Premium
$500
Sealed by May 24, 2026 · FRE 901 chain of custody ·
Site state has likely changed
Sealed forensic record · Report #397
What's for sale here is a dated, hashed snapshot of a defendant's live tracking behavior, marketing representations, and consent UX, sealed under FRE 901 chain of custody on the day we captured it. Defendants rewrite their policies and pull their pixels the moment a complaint lands — this record is the only proof of what the site was doing before.
Case at a glance
LocationHQ: New York
Nat'l classNationwide plausible — ROSCA (federal)
ArbitrationClass-viable — browsewrap, likely unenforceable
ClaimsROSCA / FTC Click-to-Cancel / CARU / auto-renewal laws
**ROSCA / Click-to-Cancel / Auto-Renewal Compliance**
Consumer-facing subscription platform. Case theory implicates ROSCA (15 U.S.C. § 7704), FTC Negative Option Rule (16 CFR § 429), and state auto-renewal statutes. Agent captured 35 verbatim representations across ~15–25 pages.
Representations include: "Subscribe & Save 20%", "Free bowl set with your first order", and "Change flavors anytime Skip or cancel delivery anytime". Pricing representations state "Current price $54 was $59" and "5 DAYS ONLY · MAY 21–25". Nutritional claims: "High Protein, 0-2g Sugar", "12-14g complete protein in every bowl", and "0-2g Sugar No cane sugar, corn syrup, or sugar alcohol".
Four accessibility violations identified across scanned pages. No third-party trackers detected.
10 screenshots with chain-of-custody seals. Sealed PDF: ~15–25 pages.
Case theory: ROSCA / FTC Click-to-Cancel
What you receive
- Sealed PDF report (typical 15–28 pp) with full chain of custody — SHA-256 + RFC 3161 timestamps on every artifact
- Verbatim binding representations with Wayback-anchored class-period bounds
- Full network capture: every tracker fire, sensitive transmission, identity-sync event
- Wrap classification: BROWSEWRAP / CLICKWRAP / SIGN-IN-WRAP verdict + Specht-line alignment
- Per-circuit case-law alignment (LIKELY_UNENFORCEABLE / LIKELY_ENFORCEABLE / JURISDICTIONALLY_DEPENDENT)
- Defendant name + domain — revealed at purchase
✓ Prior-litigation check: clear.
No prior plaintiff-class filing found against this defendant on this theory
(CourtListener federal + web search of state courts, checked 2026-06-07).
Safe to list (theory not yet litigated), but defendant has 1 active suit(s) on a DIFFERENT theory — disclose: Senior v. Magic Spoon Inc.
⚠ Note: this defendant has 1 active class action(s) on a different legal theory (not this lane) — named and cited in the sealed report so you can assess coordination / related-case rules.
Safe to list (theory not yet litigated), but defendant has 1 active suit(s) on a DIFFERENT theory — disclose: Senior v. Magic Spoon Inc.
⚠ Note: this defendant has 1 active class action(s) on a different legal theory (not this lane) — named and cited in the sealed report so you can assess coordination / related-case rules.