A federal judge recently dismissed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings (BWW) regarding the use of the term “boneless chicken wings.” Customers had argued that this name misled them into believing the dish was made from real chicken wings with the bones taken out.
In a somewhat humorous ruling filled with birds-and-food puns, U.S. District Judge John Tharp Jr. stated that the plaintiffs hadn’t presented a case with “meat on its bones,” and it wasn’t likely that a reasonable person would be confused by the name. He referenced a recent ruling from the Ohio Supreme Court, noting that consumers don’t actually expect “chicken fingers” to be derived from chicken fingers, and compared “boneless wings” to other common food names that aren’t literally true.
Aymen Halim, the plaintiff, claimed that BWW’s boneless wings are more like chicken nuggets made from breast meat, arguing that the name misrepresents the product because it implies a type of meat from a boneless chicken wing.
Halim’s suit also alleged violations of various regulations, including the Illinois Consumer Fraud Law, and sought to establish a nationwide class action. He maintained that had he realized the true nature of the product, he might have either opted for a cheaper option or not ordered it at all.
However, the court ruled that the term “boneless chicken wings” was just a “fanciful name” and noted that no reasonable consumer would believe that such wings are “franken chickens” or something similar. The judgment, spanning ten pages, concluded that Mr. Halim didn’t generate enough factual claims to support his case.
While the judge acknowledged that Halim had the right to sue based on claimed economic damages, he ultimately dismissed the suit due to a lack of evidence suggesting deception. Judge Tharp Jr. even set a March 20 deadline for Halim to submit a revised complaint but seemed doubtful that any further details could effectively change the case’s outcome.
