A federal judge says a woman’s lawsuit against Subway can move forward, refusing the restaurant chain’s request to dismiss the suit that alleges its tuna sandwiches “partially or wholly” lack tuna…

(Nilima) Amin’s lawsuit cites a marine biologist who analyzed 20 samples of tuna offerings from 20 different Subway restaurants and found “no detectable tuna DNA sequences whatsoever” in 19 samples. But, Amin says, the samples did contain other types of animal DNA, such as from chicken and pork…

…The case centers on what consumers expect when they order a tuna sandwich: The word “tuna” appears 244 times in the plaintiff’s 28-page amended complaint…

Amin is seeking a jury trial and class-action status for her lawsuit, which accuses Subway of fraud, false advertising, and unfair competition. The suit seeks restitution, punitive damages and “disgorgement of all ill-gotten gains” from Subway, one of the top-grossing restaurant chains in the U.S.

I think “disgorgement” adds a nice touch to the lawsuit, eh?