A federal judge in San Francisco has allowed key claims to proceed in a proposed class action over how Anthropic advertised usage on its paid Claude Max plans. The Nov. 6 order examines whether customers could reasonably read promises of five or 20 times more usage as applying to an entire month, even though the advertised multiples applied to five-hour sessions under the plans at issue.
The case concerns a distinction that can affect a subscription decision even before a court reaches a verdict. A higher allowance in a short window lets someone do more work in one sitting. A separate weekly allowance determines how long they can keep working at that pace. Paying more can increase both allowances, but the two limits can rise by different amounts.
Why the old usage claims are in court
The plaintiffs, Karl Kahn and Solomon Smith, argue that subscribers paying monthly could have understood Anthropic's headline figures as comparisons for the month they were buying. Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse cited the complaint's example for the Sonnet 4 model. It estimated that the old Max 5x plan provided 3.5 times the weekly allowance of Pro and that Max 20x provided six times the weekly allowance. Those are figures from the plaintiffs' complaint for a particular model and period. They are not current plan specifications or measurements made by the court.
Anthropic argued that it disclosed both the session and weekly limits. The judge noted that the explanation of the session multiplier was two links away from the primary sales pages and that a customer could subscribe without seeing it. At this stage, he found the alleged interpretation plausible. The order does not determine whether Anthropic misled subscribers or whether any customer is owed money.
What Claude lists for subscribers now
Anthropic's current U.S. pricing page lists Pro at $20 on a monthly plan or $200 paid up front for a year. Max costs $100 a month and advertises five times the Pro allowance for both five-hour periods and weeks. Ultra costs $200 a month and advertises ten times the Pro weekly allowance, with no five-hour cap for verified accounts. The prices exclude applicable tax.
On monthly billing, moving from Pro to Max costs an extra $80 a month. Moving from Max to Ultra costs another $100 and doubles the advertised weekly multiplier, from five to ten. The advertised absence of a five-hour cap on Ultra has its own eligibility condition. The current Ultra offering differs from the historical Max 20x plan discussed in the order. See our Claude plan comparison for details on API credits and billing.
Anthropic says the model used, conversation length and file size affect how quickly people hit a limit. A weekly multiplier therefore does not translate directly into a fixed number of messages. The relevant comparison depends on the limit that interrupts a reader's work. Someone who runs out during a single work session faces a different constraint from someone who repeatedly reaches a weekly ceiling.
What the ruling means for subscribers
Smith's claim under California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act can proceed, along with the negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract claims. The judge dismissed Kahn's claim under that same consumer statute because the complaint did not explain his personal use in enough detail. He also dismissed the false advertising and unfair competition claims and a separate claim about good faith in carrying out the contract. He gave the plaintiffs permission to revise the dismissed claims.
The order does not certify a class, create a refund program or set a deadline for customers to file a claim. It gives the plaintiffs until Dec. 2 to amend their complaint. If they leave it as is, Anthropic has until Dec. 16 to respond.
