Judge dismisses lawsuit over 'boneless wings' at Buffalo Wild Wings

Ruling says 'boneless wings' is a common term that has existed for over two decades

Published on Feb. 23, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge in Chicago has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a customer who claimed the use of the term 'boneless wings' at Buffalo Wild Wings was deceptive and false advertising. The judge ruled that 'boneless wings' is a widely understood term and that the customer failed to show a reasonable consumer would be misled by it.

Why it matters

This case highlights the challenges consumers face in bringing lawsuits over product labeling, even when they feel they have been misled. The ruling suggests courts may be reluctant to intervene in such cases unless there is clear evidence of deception.

The details

Aimen Halim filed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings in 2023, alleging the use of the term 'boneless wings' was deceptive. Halim said he expected to receive deboned chicken wings when he ordered 'boneless wings' at a Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant, but instead received 'essentially chicken nuggets.' Halim sought monetary damages, claiming he would have paid less or not bought the product had he known what he was truly eating. However, U.S. District Judge John Tharp Jr. dismissed Halim's claims, ruling that 'boneless wings' is a common term that has existed for over two decades and that Halim failed to show a reasonable consumer would be misled by it.

  • Halim filed the lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings in 2023.
  • The judge dismissed the lawsuit on February 18, 2026.
  • Halim has until March 20, 2026 to amend his complaint, though the judge said it would be difficult to overturn the ruling.

The players

Aimen Halim

A Chicago resident who filed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings, claiming the use of the term 'boneless wings' was deceptive.

Judge John Tharp Jr.

The U.S. District Judge who dismissed Halim's lawsuit, ruling that 'boneless wings' is a widely understood term and Halim failed to show a reasonable consumer would be misled by it.

Buffalo Wild Wings

The Atlanta-based restaurant chain that was sued by Halim over its use of the term 'boneless wings.'

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Boneless wings are not a niche product for which a consumer would need to do extensive research to figure out the truth. Instead, 'boneless wings' is a common term that has existed for over two decades.”

— Judge John Tharp Jr., U.S. District Judge (suntimes.com)

What’s next

Halim has until March 20, 2026 to amend his complaint, though the judge said it would be difficult to overturn the ruling.

The takeaway

This case highlights the challenges consumers face in bringing lawsuits over product labeling, as courts may be reluctant to intervene unless there is clear evidence of deception. The ruling suggests 'boneless wings' is a widely understood term that reasonable consumers would not find misleading.