The Mid America Pet Food Salmonella Recall Settlement offered a $5.5 million fund to compensate pet owners who purchased contaminated dog and cat food sold under brands like Victor, Wayne Feeds, Eagle Mountain, and Member’s Mark. If you bought any of these products between October 31, 2022 and February 29, 2024, you were eligible to file a claim for reimbursement ranging from $20 per bag without a receipt up to $100,000 for documented pet injuries. However, the claim filing deadline was February 5, 2026, which has now passed — meaning new claims can no longer be submitted. This settlement stems from a serious Salmonella contamination that sickened at least seven people across seven states, six of whom were infants under one year old. One person was hospitalized. The recalls began on September 3, 2023 and expanded twice more that fall, covering all MAPF-manufactured dog and cat food with best-by dates before October 31, 2024.
The case, *Filardi v. Mid-America Pet Food, LLC* (Case No. 23-cv-11170-NSR), was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against the Mount Pleasant, Texas-based manufacturer. Even if you missed the filing window, understanding the details matters if you are waiting on a pending claim or want to know your rights going forward.
Table of Contents
- What Was the Mid America Pet Food Salmonella Recall Settlement and Who Was Eligible to File a Claim?
- How Much Money Could Claimants Actually Receive From This Settlement?
- The Salmonella Outbreak That Triggered the Recalls and the FDA’s Findings
- How the Claim Filing Process Worked and What Documentation Helped
- The Claim Deadline Has Passed — What Happens Now?
- Which Pet Food Brands Were Recalled and How to Check Your Products
- What This Settlement Means for Pet Food Safety Going Forward
What Was the Mid America Pet Food Salmonella Recall Settlement and Who Was Eligible to File a Claim?
The settlement resolved allegations that mid America Pet Food, LLC manufactured and distributed dog and cat food contaminated with Salmonella, putting both pets and their owners at risk. The $5.5 million fund was established to reimburse consumers for purchases and compensate those whose pets became sick or died after eating the recalled products. Eligibility was straightforward: any U.S. resident who purchased one or more affected MAPF products during the purchase window of October 31, 2022 through February 29, 2024 could file a claim. The recalled brands included Victor Super Premium Dog and Cat Food, Wayne Feeds Dog and Cat Food, Eagle Mountain Pet Food, and two varieties of Member’s Mark Pet Food.
It is worth noting that not every product from these brands was necessarily recalled — the recalls specifically targeted items manufactured at the MAPF facility in Mount Pleasant, Texas with best-by dates before October 31, 2024. If you bought a bag of Victor dog food in early 2023 and your dog developed gastrointestinal symptoms shortly after, that purchase would have fallen squarely within the eligible window. On the other hand, if you bought the same brand after February 29, 2024, that purchase would not qualify regardless of whether the product was later recalled. One important distinction: eligibility was based on the purchase date, not the recall date. The first recall was not announced until September 3, 2023, but the purchase window reached back nearly a year earlier to October 31, 2022. This broader window acknowledged that contaminated products were on shelves and in homes well before the company or regulators took action.
How Much Money Could Claimants Actually Receive From This Settlement?
The settlement established a tiered compensation structure that paid more to those with stronger documentation. At the lowest tier, pet owners who purchased recalled food but had no receipts could claim $20 per bag, up to a maximum of two bags, for a total of $40. Those who kept their purchase receipts could recover 100 percent of their documented costs. For many consumers who bought one or two bags of dog food, the realistic payout without receipts was modest — but it required nothing more than a simple claim form. The compensation climbed significantly for pet owners whose animals were harmed. If your pet became ill after eating the recalled food, you could submit a declaration and receive $50 per affected pet, no veterinary records required.
If a pet died, that figure rose to $100 per pet, again based solely on a signed declaration. However, if you had documented veterinary bills, medical expenses, or other losses tied to a pet injury from the recalled food, you could claim up to $100,000 in fully documented losses — paid at 100 percent of approved amounts. The gap between the declaration-only tiers and the fully documented tier is stark, and it underscores a practical reality of class action settlements: keeping records matters enormously. It is also important to understand that $5.5 million had to cover all approved claims plus administrative costs and attorney fees. If the number of claimants was high, the per-person payouts in the lower tiers could have been reduced on a pro rata basis. Conversely, if few people filed, the payouts would have remained at their full stated values. This is a common feature of class action settlements that many people overlook — the advertised maximums are not guaranteed.
The Salmonella Outbreak That Triggered the Recalls and the FDA’s Findings
The contamination was not a theoretical risk. Between January 14 and August 19, 2023, seven people across seven states were infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella linked to MAPF products. What made this outbreak particularly alarming was the victim profile: six of the seven infected individuals were infants under one year old, and one person required hospitalization. Infants are especially vulnerable to Salmonella because their immune systems are still developing, and exposure likely came from contact with contaminated pet food or surfaces where it had been handled — not from eating it themselves. The recalls rolled out in stages. The initial recall on September 3, 2023 covered a limited set of products, but as testing and investigation continued, MAPF expanded the recall on October 30, 2023 and again on November 9, 2023 to include all dog and cat food with best-by dates before October 31, 2024.
That final expansion was sweeping and effectively pulled the company’s entire recent production off shelves. The FDA did not stop at the recalls. On November 22, 2024, the agency issued a formal warning letter to Mid America Pet Food, LLC regarding conditions at their manufacturing facility at 2024 N. Frontage Road in Mount Pleasant, Texas. Warning letters from the FDA are public records that signal serious regulatory violations, and they typically follow inspections that revealed failures in food safety protocols. The letter added an official layer of government scrutiny on top of the private litigation, painting a picture of a facility where the contamination was not simply an isolated accident.
How the Claim Filing Process Worked and What Documentation Helped
Claims could be filed through the official settlement website at www.MidAmericaPetFoodSettlement.com or by mailing a paper form. The online process was the faster and more reliable route, requiring claimants to provide their contact information, identify which products they purchased, and select the compensation tier they were claiming under. For the basic purchase reimbursement without receipts, the process was simple — name, address, product identification, and a declaration that you bought the food. The tradeoff between the tiers came down to documentation. Filing a $20-per-bag claim with no receipts took minutes and required no supporting evidence beyond your word.
Filing a claim for up to $100,000 in pet injury losses required veterinary records, medical bills, receipts, and potentially other evidence showing a direct connection between the recalled food and your pet’s illness or death. For someone whose dog developed chronic health problems after eating contaminated food and who had vet bills totaling thousands of dollars, the effort of gathering that documentation was well worth it. For someone who simply wanted their $35 bag of kibble refunded, the no-receipt path was the practical choice. One thing the settlement did well was offering the $50 and $100 declaration-only tiers for pet illness and death. Many pet owners do not take their animals to the vet at the first sign of gastrointestinal distress, and requiring full veterinary documentation for every sick pet would have excluded a large number of legitimate claims. The declaration-only approach acknowledged that reality, even if the payouts were relatively small.
The Claim Deadline Has Passed — What Happens Now?
The claim filing deadline was February 5, 2026, and as of today, March 1, 2026, that window has closed. If you did not submit a claim before the deadline, you cannot file one now. This is a firm cutoff in class action settlements, and courts very rarely grant extensions for individual claimants who simply missed the date. The exclusion and objection deadline was even earlier, on January 6, 2026, meaning the period to opt out of the settlement or formally object to its terms has also expired. The Final Approval Hearing was scheduled for February 6, 2026 at 10:00 AM via Webex Teleconference. At that hearing, the court would have reviewed the settlement terms, considered any objections, and decided whether to grant final approval.
As of this writing, no public information confirms the outcome of that hearing. If the settlement was approved — which is the typical outcome when no significant objections are raised — the claims administrator would begin processing and distributing payments to approved claimants. If you filed a claim before the deadline, you should monitor the settlement website or any correspondence from the claims administrator for updates on payment timing. One warning for those who did file: settlement payouts in cases like this often take months after final approval. The claims administrator must review every submission, verify documentation, calculate pro rata adjustments if the fund is oversubscribed, and then cut checks. Patience is required, and any emails or calls claiming to speed up your payment in exchange for fees or personal information should be treated as scams.
Which Pet Food Brands Were Recalled and How to Check Your Products
The four brand families covered by the recall were Victor Super Premium Dog and Cat Food, Wayne Feeds Dog and Cat Food, Eagle Mountain Pet Food, and Member’s Mark Pet Food (two varieties). Victor was by far the most widely recognized of these brands, sold at farm and ranch supply stores and specialty pet retailers across the country. Member’s Mark products are the private-label line sold at Sam’s Club, which meant the recall reached a large warehouse-club customer base as well.
If you still have bags of pet food at home and are unsure whether they were affected, the key identifier was the best-by date. Any MAPF-manufactured product with a best-by date before October 31, 2024 fell under the recall. The official settlement website at www.MidAmericaPetFoodSettlement.com listed specific product details and UPC codes. Even though the claim deadline has passed, you should still dispose of any recalled product that might remain in your home — the Salmonella risk does not expire with the legal deadline.
What This Settlement Means for Pet Food Safety Going Forward
The Mid America Pet Food case is part of a broader pattern of pet food safety failures that have drawn increasing regulatory attention. The FDA’s warning letter to MAPF in November 2024 signals that the agency is not treating this as a closed matter, and the conditions cited at the Mount Pleasant facility suggest systemic issues rather than a one-time lapse. For consumers, the takeaway is that pet food — like human food — can carry serious pathogen risks, and manufacturers do not always catch contamination before products reach store shelves.
Going forward, pet owners should pay attention to FDA recall announcements, register products when possible to receive direct notifications, and be cautious about handling pet food around infants and immunocompromised individuals. The fact that six of the seven human Salmonella cases in this outbreak were babies under one year old is a sobering reminder that the risks extend well beyond the pets themselves. The $5.5 million settlement provides some financial relief, but it cannot undo the harm caused to the families and animals affected by this contamination.