Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Over 'Boneless Wings' at Buffalo Wild Wings

The court ruled that 'boneless wings' is a fanciful term, not a literal anatomical claim.

Published on Mar. 1, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings over the term 'boneless wings,' ruling that it's a descriptive term for chicken breast meat, not a misleading label. The plaintiff, Aimen Halim, argued that boneless wings are not actually made from chicken wings, but the court applied the 'reasonable consumer' standard and concluded that the term is unlikely to fool the average customer.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing debate around food labeling and consumer expectations. While some may argue that 'boneless wings' is misleading, the court determined that it is a commonly used term in the industry that describes a style of food preparation, not the specific cut of chicken.

The details

Halim filed the lawsuit under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, seeking to make it a class action. He claimed that if he had known boneless wings were made from chicken breast, he would not have ordered them or would not have paid as much. However, the court ruled that 'boneless wings' is a fanciful term, not a literal anatomical claim, and pointed out that Buffalo Wild Wings also sells 'cauliflower wings' under the same menu section.

  • The lawsuit was filed on February 17, 2026.
  • The judge dismissed the complaint on February 20, 2026.
  • The judge granted Halim until March 20, 2026, to amend his complaint if he can allege additional facts that would plausibly show consumer deception.

The players

Aimen Halim

The plaintiff who filed the lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings over the term 'boneless wings'.

Judge John J. Tharp Jr.

The U.S. District Judge who dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that 'boneless wings' is a fanciful term, not a misleading label.

Buffalo Wild Wings

The restaurant chain that was sued over the term 'boneless wings'.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Chickens do have wings, and those wings contain bones. So a 'boneless wing' is, by definition, not a literal wing.”

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

What’s next

The judge has given the plaintiff until March 20, 2026, to amend his complaint if he can allege additional facts that would plausibly show consumer deception.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing debate around food labeling and consumer expectations. While some may argue that 'boneless wings' is misleading, the court determined that it is a commonly used term in the industry that describes a style of food preparation, not the specific cut of chicken.