Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Over Buffalo Wild Wings 'Boneless Wings'
Judge John J. Tharp Jr. ruled Buffalo Wild Wings' 'boneless wings' label is not deceptive in a 2023 suit by Aimen Halim, who sought roughly $10m and has until 20 March to amend his complaint.
Overview
Judge John J. Tharp Jr. dismissed Aimen Halim's 2023 suit over Buffalo Wild Wings' 'boneless wings' and gave Halim until 20 March to file an amended complaint.
Halim sued after buying boneless wings in January 2023 in Mt. Prospect, Illinois, alleging the label misled consumers under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act and seeking roughly $10 million in damages.
Tharp said 'boneless wings' is a common term used for over two decades and that reasonable consumers would not be deceived, and Buffalo Wild Wings posted a social media quip about its 'boneless wings'.
The complaint sought nationwide class action relief and alleged consumers would have paid less or declined purchase had they known the boneless wings were made from chicken breast rather than deboned wing meat.
Tharp allowed Halim to amend by 20 March but wrote it was difficult to imagine additional facts showing deception, leaving the possibility of further litigation unresolved.
Analysis
Center-leaning sources frame the story as a lighthearted, legally settled consumer quibble by foregrounding the judge's dismissive puns and legal ruling while downplaying the plaintiff's perspective and lacking a substantive BWW response. Language like "no meat on its bones," selective quotation of the judge, and social-media color reinforce a trivializing editorial tone.
Sources (3)
FAQ
Halim sued Buffalo Wild Wings in 2023, alleging violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, breach of express warranty, common law fraud, and unjust enrichment. He claimed that the term 'boneless wings' is deceptive because the product is made from chicken breast meat rather than deboned chicken wings, and sought roughly $10 million in damages. Halim argued he would have paid less or refused to purchase the product had he known its true composition, and attempted to bring the lawsuit as a nationwide class action.[1]
Judge Tharp ruled that 'boneless wings' is not a deceptive term but rather a 'fanciful name' that has been in common use for over two decades. He argued that a reasonable consumer would not be misled by the term, comparing it to other food names like 'buffalo wings' (which refers to sauce type, not the meat source) and 'chicken fingers' (which are not made from fingers). Tharp concluded that Halim's complaint had 'no meat on its bones' and did not contain enough factual allegations to support a claim of deception.
No, the ruling does not permanently close the case. Judge Tharp gave Halim until March 20, 2026, to file an amended complaint with additional factual allegations. However, the judge signaled skepticism about whether any 'additional facts' could be provided to salvage the claim, leaving the possibility of further litigation uncertain.
Buffalo Wild Wings argued that context clues make it clear the product cannot be made of wing meat. The company pointed to another product sold at their restaurants—cauliflower wings—as a comparison, noting that customers would reasonably understand such items are not made from actual wing meat. Judge Tharp adopted this reasoning in his opinion, noting that a reasonable consumer would not expect a 'Franken-wing' made from reconstituted deboned wing meat.
History
This story does not have any previous versions.