FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2025 filing

Stretch Lab litigation history

What Stretch Lab 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: 12; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: $450K; As stated in Item 3

Bankruptcy (Item 4): Disclosed · an officer; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2025; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Item 3 (litigation) · 12 matters disclosed · 9 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Concluded (2)

In the Matter of: The Commissioner of Financial Protection and Innovation v. Xponential Fitness, Inc., et al.
concluded
Government or regulatory action · filed 2024-11-04 · California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
“… On November 4, 2024, in order to avoid the expense of a hearing and other possible court proceedings, the Commissioner of California’s Department of”Page 19 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “... admitting nor denying any of the Commissioner’s findings, to desist and refrain from violating Sections 31110, 31200 and 31201 of the California Corporations Code and to pay an administrative penalty of $450,000.”
Stretch Lab Franchise, LLC, et al. vs. Stretch Lab, LLC, et. al.
dismissed
Brought by the franchisor · Stretch Lab Franchise, LLC (Predecessor) · filed 2018 · United States District Court for the Central District of California · 2:18-cv-07816
“… (Case No.: 2:18-cv-07816). In October 2018, Predecessor filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) against the Initial Operator and its principals (the “Defendants”) in the United States District Court”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (9)

4LMVMT, LLC, et al. v. Yoga Six Franchise, LLC, et al.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Yoga Six Franchise, LLC and Xponential · filed 2025-01-24 · American Arbitration Association, Irvine, California · 01-25-0000-3620
“… filed January 24, 2025, American Arbitration Association, Irvine, California), Case No. 01-25-0000-3620 (the “4LMVMT Arbitration”).”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Alex Zaltsman, Fitwell License Holdings, LLC, XPO Fitness Operator, LLC, RH Ventures II, LLC, and PB Ventures I, LLC v. Xponential Fitness LLC, Row House Franchise, LLC, and PB Franchising, LLC
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Xponential Fitness LLC and affiliates · filed 2025-02-26 · American Arbitration Association · 01-25-0001-1348
“… American Arbitration Association, Case No. 01-25-0001-1348.”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Nickle Acquisition LLC v. Xponential Fitness, Inc. et al.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Xponential Fitness, Inc. and affiliates · filed 2025-02-03 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange · 30-2025-01459041-CU-AT-CXC
“… filed February 3, 2025, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, Case No. 30-2025-01459041-CU-AT-CXC (the “Nickle Acquisition Lawsuit”).”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Rumble Marina Co. and Jason Mighdoll v. Rumble Fitness, LLC, Rumble 1001, LLC, and Xponential Fitness, Inc.
pending
Rumble Fitness, LLC and Xponential Fitness, Inc. · filed 2025-07-18 · Superior Court of the State of California, San Francisco County · CGC25627419
“… Superior Court of the State of California, San Francisco County, Case No. CGC25627419.”Page 17 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
American Health Concepts, LLC and Yaqim Lalani v. Yoga Six Franchise, LLC et al.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Yoga Six Franchise, LLC and Xponential · filed 2024-12-11 · Superior Court of Dekalb County, State of Georgia (removed to N.D. Ga.) · 24-cv-11069
“… filed December 11, 2024, Superior Court of Dekalb County State of Georgia, Case No. 24-cv-11069 (the “AHC Lawsuit”).”Page 16 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
City of Taylor General Employees Retirement System v. Xponential Fitness, Inc., et al. (consolidated with City of West Palm Beach Police Pension Fund v. Xponential Fitness, Inc., et al.)
pending
Brought by a third party · Xponential Fitness, Inc. (XFI) · filed 2024-02-09 · United States District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division · 8:24-cv-00285
“City of Taylor General Employees Retirement System v. Xponential Fitness, Inc., Anthony Geisler, John Meloun, Mark Grabowski, Brenda Morris, Chelsea Grayson, BoFA Securities, Inc., Jefferies LLC, Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Guggenheim Securities, LLC, Piper”Page 18 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Gideon Akande v. Anthony Geisler, et al. and Xponential Fitness, Inc. (Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Action with Ayers and Nelson)
pending
Brought by a third party · Xponential Fitness, Inc. (nominal) and its officers and directors · filed 2024-03-10 · United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division · 2:24-cv-01928
“Gideon Akande v. Anthony Geisler, John Meloun, Jair Clarke, Mark Grabowski, Chelsea A. Grayson, Brenda Morris, and Xponential Fitness, Inc., filed March 10, 2024, United States District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division, Case No. 2:24-cv-01928.”Page 18 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Dance Fitness Michigan LLC, et al. v. AKT Franchise, LLC, et al.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · AKT Franchise, LLC, Xponential and the parent group · filed 2023-08-30 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange · 30-2023-01345433-CU- AT-CXC
“… filed August 30, 2023 (as amended on March 28, 2025), Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, Case No. 30-2023-01345433-CU- AT-CXC (the “AKT Lawsuit”).”Page 14 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3
Enlightened Armadillo, Inc., et al. v. Yoga Six Franchise, LLC, et al.
pending
Brought by a franchisee · Yoga Six Franchise, LLC, Xponential and the parent group · filed 2023-11-22 · Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange · 30-2023-01367265-CU-AT-CXC
“… filed November 22, 2023, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, Case No. 30-2023-01367265-CU-AT-CXC (the “EA Lawsuit”).”Page 15 of the 2025 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (1)

In the Matter of Determining Whether there has been a violation of the Franchise Investment Protection Act by: Xponential Fitness LLC
concluded
Government or regulatory action · Xponential Fitness LLC · filed 2025-08-12 · State of Washington Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division
“… On August 12, 2025, the State of Washington’s Department of Financial Institutions, Securities Division (“DFI”) and”Page 19 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.

Disclosed in the 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 4: bankruptcy

Personal Chapter 7 bankruptcy of Xponential COO-North America Timothy Weiderhoft and spouse (filed Aug 2023, discharged Dec 2023, unrelated restaurant venture failed due to COVID-19); also Chapter 11 of Instant Brands Acquisition Holdings Inc. (former employer of CMO Louise Ocasion, unrelated to franchisor)

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

Disclosed bankruptcies are executives' unrelated personal/prior-employer filings

The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.

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 Stretch Lab verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls