The tuna used in Subway's tuna sandwich is alleged in a new lawsuit to be, well, something else entirely. The company, however, has denied the suit's allegations.

The suit, per the Washington Post, was recently filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and alleges that the ingredient in question is actually "a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna." 

While a Subway rep quoted in the report said the claims of the suit are "without merit" and said the company's tuna is tuna, the suit cites results of independent lab tests that allegedly showed the "concoctions" are "blended together" by the company to "imitate" tuna's appearance.

The plaintiffs—Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin of the Bay Area—have sued the ubiquitous sandwich brand for fraud, intentional misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and additional claims. Attorneys are said to be aiming to get the claim certified as a class action to allow for potentially thousands of Subway tuna-consuming customers in the state to join the case, so long as they consumed that tuna after Jan. 21, 2017.

In the description for the tuna salad option on its website, Subway says the dish includes "flaked tuna in brine" and additional ingredients.

Complex reached out to reps for Subway for additional comment. A spokesperson offered the following statement:

"There simply is no truth to the allegations in the complaint that was filed in California. Subway delivers 100 percent cooked tuna to its restaurants, which is mixed with mayonnaise and used in freshly made sandwiches, wraps and salads that are served to and enjoyed by our guests. The taste and quality of our tuna make it one of Subway's most popular products and these baseless accusations threaten to damage our franchisees, small business owners who work tirelessly to uphold the high standards that Subway sets for all of its products, including its tuna. Given the facts, the lawsuit constitutes a reckless and improper attack on Subway's brand and goodwill, and on the livelihood of its California franchisees. Indeed, there is no basis in law or fact for the plaintiffs' claims, which are frivolous and are being pursued without adequate investigation.

Unfortunately, this lawsuit is part of a trend in which the named plaintiffs' attorneys have been targeting the food industry in an effort to make a name for themselves in that space. Subway will vigorously defend itself against these and any other baseless efforts to mischaracterize and tarnish the high-quality products that Subway and its franchisees provide to their customers, in California and around the world, and intends to fight these claims through all available avenues if they are not immediately dismissed."

In September of last year, Ireland's Supreme Court ruled the bread used in Subway sandwiches can't legally be referred to as bread due to its sugar content. The bread, per the ruling, is said to have used five times the amount of sugar Ireland determined in the VAT Act of 1972. According to the act, sugar in a bread product is now allowed to exceed more than two percent of the total weight of flour used in the dough.

So, what's everyone doing for lunch today?