Kahn v. Anthropic PBC is a proposed consumer class action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, docket No. 3:26-cv-05763, on behalf of Washington, D.C. resident Karl Kahn. The complaint alleges that Anthropic overstated the usage allowances available on its higher-tier Claude subscription plans (Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/?q=Kahn+Anthropic). The case was reported by the Wall Street Journal on 15 June 2026 (Source: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-sued-over-limits-on-its-200-a-month-ai-plans-e2a109e4).
Background
Anthropic offers Claude subscriptions at several price points, including a Pro plan priced at roughly $17–$20 per month and two higher "Max" tiers marketed as offering five times and twenty times the Pro plan's usage caps: Max 5x at $100 per month and Max 20x at $200 per month (Source: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-sued-over-limits-on-its-200-a-month-ai-plans-e2a109e4).
Claims
According to the Wall Street Journal's account of the complaint, the suit alleges that the real usage limits on the Max 5x and Max 20x plans are lower than the advertised multiples and are difficult for subscribers to determine in advance. The complaint rests in substantial part on emails Anthropic sent to subscribers in July 2025 describing the weekly usage each plan was expected to allow (Source: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-sued-over-limits-on-its-200-a-month-ai-plans-e2a109e4). The suit seeks class-action status covering subscribers since April 2025.
Procedural history
The complaint was docketed on 14 June 2026 (Source: https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-sued-over-limits-on-its-200-a-month-ai-plans-e2a109e4). Anthropic moved to dismiss, arguing that the clarifying information about usage limits "required nothing more than clicking hyperlinks available in the purchase process—the digital equivalent of flipping a product over to read the back label" (Source: theverge.com).
Current status
A group of Claude subscribers filed an expanded class action against Anthropic on 8 September 2026 over the same subscription-limit claims, following a July complaint that was withdrawn and refiled. The expanded complaint alleges that the "5x" and "20x" multiples advertised for the $100 and $200 Max tiers apply only within five-hour sessions that are themselves subject to a weekly limit. The Verge described the suit as brought by Monica Vaca and Kati Daffan, both formerly of the Federal Trade Commission (Source: theverge.com); the docket lists them, of Vaca Daffan LLP, as counsel for plaintiff Karl Kahn rather than as parties. The docket also shows that the September 8 filing is not a separate case: on September 4, 2026 the court entered a stipulated order (ECF 35) consolidating Kahn v. Anthropic, PBC, No. 3:26-cv-05763-AGT, with Smith v. Anthropic, PBC, No. 3:26-cv-07789-AGT, with Kahn as the master file, and the September 8 filing (ECF 37) is the consolidated complaint. Anthropic moved to dismiss on September 22, 2026 (ECF 39) (Source: courtlistener.com).
Relationships
- related: Anthropic — defendant.
- related: Bartz v. Anthropic — separate action against the same defendant in the same district.
- related: Ai Consumer Protection — advertising and disclosure standards for AI subscription products.