Buffalo Wild Wings Wins "Boneless Wings" Lawsuit, Judge Affirms Term Not Deceptive

A U.S. District Judge in Illinois has dismissed a lawsuit filed against Buffalo Wild Wings, affirming the restaurant chain's right to continue labeling its product as "boneless wings." The plaintiff had argued the term was deceptive because the item is made from chicken breast meat, not deboned chicken wings. The judge concluded that reasonable consumers are not likely to be misled by the term, which has been in common use for over two decades.

Legal Proceedings and Ruling

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge John Tharp of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois issued a 10-page ruling in favor of Buffalo Wild Wings. The decision allows the company to maintain the "boneless wings" designation on its menu.

Background of the Lawsuit

The lawsuit was filed in March 2023 by Aimen Halim, who alleged violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act. Halim claimed he expected "wings that were deboned" and argued that the product, made from chicken breast, should be named differently, such as "chicken poppers." He stated that he would have purchased the item for less or not at all had he known its true composition and sought monetary damages. Buffalo Wild Wings asserted that a reasonable consumer would not be misled by the term.

Judge's Rationale

Judge Tharp determined that Halim did not provide sufficient factual allegations to support his claim of deception. The judge's opinion stated that the term "boneless wings" is not deceptive but a "fanciful name."

The judge's opinion stated that the term "boneless wings" is not deceptive but a "fanciful name."

Key points from the judge's reasoning included:

• The term "boneless wings" has been in common use for over two decades and is familiar to consumers.
• Reasonable consumers are not likely to be deceived, as words can have multiple meanings (e.g., "buffalo wing" referring to a sauce type rather than the meat source).
• A comparison was drawn to other menu items, such as "chicken fingers," with the judge citing a 2024 Ohio Supreme Court ruling:

  "‘[a] diner reading ‘boneless wings’ on a menu would no more believe that the restaurant was warranting the absence of bones in the items than believe that the items were made from chicken wings, just as a person eating ‘chicken fingers’ would know that he had not been served fingers.'"

• The judge also referenced Buffalo Wild Wings' "cauliflower wings," noting that a reasonable customer would not believe that dish is made from wing meat.

Subsequent Actions

Following the ruling, Buffalo Wild Wings offered a "buy one, get one" boneless wing promotion. Halim has been granted permission to amend his initial complaint by March 20, should he be able to provide additional facts demonstrating a deceptive act by Buffalo Wild Wings.