Buffalo Wild Wings Lawsuit: Judge Rules ‘Boneless Wings’ Are Not Deceptive

A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings, ruling that 'boneless wings' is a standard industry term and that reasonable consumers are not misled by the lack of actual wing meat in the product.

Tharp likewise mentioned an Ohio Supreme Court judgment from 2024, where the court ruled that” [a] restaurant analysis ‘boneless wings’ on a menu would no more think that the restaurant was requiring the lack of bones in the items than think that the items were made from hen wings, equally as an individual consuming ‘chicken fingers’ would know that he had actually not been offered fingers.”.

Tharp added that a “sensible customer” would certainly not assume that the food web’s boneless wings were “really deboned poultry wings, reconstituted into some sort of Franken-wing.” Facebook/Buffalo Wild Wings.

Tharp included that a “practical customer” would certainly not assume that the food cycle’s boneless wings were “really deboned poultry wings, reconstituted into some kind of Franken-wing.” Facebook/Buffalo Wild Wings.

The court is allowing Halim to send a changed issue by March 20, although Tharp kept in mind that it “is challenging to picture” that he can offer additional realities that would certainly show that Buffalo Wild Wings “is committing a deceptive act.”.

Federal Court Dismisses Deception Claims

United States Area Court John Tharp in Illinois provided a 10-page judgment enabling the sporting activities bar chain to continue calling its food selection thing “boneless wings,” after a Chicago man submitted a legal action implicating the dining establishment of false marketing, saying the boneless wings were overpriced due to the fact that they are essentially chicken nuggets.

“Boneless wings are not a specific niche item for which a customer would certainly require to do comprehensive research to determine the fact,” he composed. “Instead, ‘boneless wings’ is a common term that has existed for over two decades.”.

Defining Common Food Terms in Law

“Halim did not ‘drum’ up sufficient valid claims to state a claim,” Tharp created. “Though he has standing to bring the insurance claim since he plausibly alleged financial injury, he does not plausibly affirm that practical consumers are tricked by BWW’s use of the term ‘boneless wings.'”.

Halim affirmed that the boneless wings are just “slices of hen breast meat deep-fried like wings,” and that customers would certainly either pay less for the boneless wings or not acquire them in any way if they understood what was in the item.