“Halim does not plausibly allege that reasonable consumers are deceived by boneless wings, so he has failed to state a plausible claim for relief,” Tharp wrote.
An Illinois judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings, finding that the claim had “no meat on its bones.”
According to CBS News, the lawsuit was originally filed on behalf of plaintiff Aimen Halim in 2023. In his lawsuit, Halim argued that the term “boneless wings” is deceptive because the item actually contains chicken breast. Halim noted that, when he purchased an order of “boneless wings” at an Illinois restaurant in January 2023, he had expected to receive “wings that were deboned.”
Attorneys for Halim said that, if their customer had known that “boneless wings” were actually chicken breast, he either would not have purchased the product or would have paid less.
Halim requested monetary compensation.
On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge John Tharp Jr. soundly rejected Halim’s claims, writing that the plaintiff failed to “drum” up sufficient evidence to support his narrative.
“Halim does not plausibly allege that reasonable consumers are deceived by boneless wings, so he has failed to state a plausible claim for relief,” Tharp wrote.
In his ruling, Tharp said that the term “boneless wings” is much less deceptive than it is fanciful. Words, Tharp wrote, can have more than one meaning, providing the example of the “buffalo wing,” a term that “refers to the type of sauce on the wing, rather than indicating it is made of buffalo meat.”
“A reasonable consumer would not think that BWW’s boneless wings were truly deboned chicken wings, reconstituted into some sort of Franken-wing,” Tharp wrote.
Tharp added that “boneless wings” are “not a niche product for which a consumer would need to do extensive research to figure out the truth” about which cut of meat is used. Instead, Tharp said, the term “boneless wing” has been used for chicken breast for more than 20 years.
Boneless wings are “essentially chicken nuggets: pieces of breast meat, deep-fried and tossed in whatever sauce or dry seasoning the customer wants,” Tharp wrote.
Tharp, notes CBS News, also compared the item to “cauliflower wings,” another product sold at Buffalo Wild Wings. Taking his earlier analogy a step further, Tharp said that a reasonable consumer wouldn’t expect cauliflower wings to contain meat from an actual chicken wing, despite having “wing” in the product name.
Buffalo Wild Wings announced the settlement, in part, through a social media post offering a “buy one, get one” deal on boneless wings.
“They’re called boneless wings and will forever be called boneless wings,” the company wrote.
Despite the ruling, the case may not be resolved. In his Tuesday order, Tharp acknowledged that Halim had asked for an opportunity to amend his lawsuit. Tharp consented, giving Halim and his legal team until March 20 to refile.
Sources
Judge says lawsuit over Buffalo Wild Wings boneless wings has “no meat on its bones”
USjudge says lawsuit over Buffalo Wild Wings ‘boneless wings’ lacks meat
Join the conversation!