FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

Pizza Hut Express litigation history

What Pizza Hut Express disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 4; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2025; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Individual Claimants v. Pizza Hut, LLC - mass arbitration demand filed with AAA in California (Case 01-25-0009-3768) on December 3, 2025 by 80 individual claimants alleging violations of California and federal wiretapping laws, statutory larceny, invasion of privacy, and intrusion upon seclusion related to franchisor's use of the Meta Pixel on its website.

Item 3 (litigation) · 4 matters disclosed · 3 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor

Pending (3)

EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC et al. v. Pizza Hut, LLC
pending
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2024-07-01 · 101st Judicial District Court in Dallas County; removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas · 24-09359; 3:24-cv-1677
“… filed as Cause No. 24-09359 in the 101st Judicial District Court in Dallas County and removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas as Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-1677. On July 1, 2024, EYM filed a second Petition and Emergency Application for Temporary and Permanent Injunctive Relief.”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Pizza Hut, LLC v. EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC, et al.
pending
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2024-06-07 · Northern District of Texas · 3:24-cv-1404
“… filed as Cause No. 3:24-cv-1404, in the Northern District of Texas. On June 7, 2024, PHLLC filed its Original Complaint against former franchisees EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC, EYM Pizza of Illinois, LLC, EYM Pizza of Indiana, LLC, EYM Pizza of SC, LLC, EYM Pizza of Wisconsin, LLC, Eduardo Diaz, EYM Pizza, L.P., EYM Foods II, LLC, and Eduardo Diaz”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Pizza Hut, LLC v. Vardayani Mata, Inc., Mahender Patel, and Parul Patel
pending
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2024-11-08 · United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas · 4:24-cv-01002-ALM
“… filed in Cause No. 4:24-cv-01002-ALM in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. On November 8, 2024, PHLLC filed a complaint against defendants to recover the legal fees and”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (1)

EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC et al. v. Pizza Hut, LLC
dismissed
Brought by a franchisee · filed 2024-03-04 · 14th Judicial District Court in Dallas County, Texas; removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas · DC-24-03395; 3:24-cv-646
“… filed as Cause No. DC-24-03395, in the 14th Judicial District Court in Dallas County, Texas and removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas as Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-646. On March 4, 2024, plaintiffs EYM Pizza of Georgia, LLC, EYM Pizza of Illinois, LLC, EYM Pizza of Indiana, LLC, EYM Pizza of SC, LLC, and”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?

Back to the Pizza Hut Express verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls