{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreiadglravlhis6tjkpnnq2i3po33sl5i2gyxsh7s7gjk6zox7alqmu",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ha7wpngv4f2qwrk5hta4ktbb/app.bsky.feed.post/3mf67aqeh6rh2"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreicrg2kmmsgyd7zg4p2qj6hf24eo7ubrjccscyxilhoxo6nz7u3pvi"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/jpeg",
    "size": 166979
  },
  "path": "/news/2026/02/18/buffalo-wild-wings-boneless-wings-lawsuit-aimen-halim",
  "publishedAt": "2026-02-18T22:24:15.068Z",
  "site": "https://chicago.suntimes.com",
  "textContent": "<p>A federal judge in Chicago has ruled there's \"no meat on [the] bones\" of a restaurant customer’s argument that its boneless wings aren’t actually chicken wings.</p><p>The ruling on Tuesday comes after Chicagoan <a class=\"Link\" href=\"https://chicago.suntimes.com/business/2023/3/13/23638027/boneless-chicken-wings-lawsuit-buffalo-wild-wings-aimen-halim-chicago-district-court\" target=\"_blank\" >Aimen Halim filed a lawsuit</a> against Buffalo Wild Wings in 2023, alleging that the use of the term “boneless wings” was deceptive and “a clear-cut case of false advertising.”</p><p>Halim bought food at a Mount Prospect Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant in January 2023 and said he expected to receive “wings that were deboned,” instead what he got were “essentially chicken nuggets.”</p><p>Halim sought monetary damages, claiming that had he known what he was truly eating, he would have either paid less for the product or not bought it at all.</p><p>U.S. District Judge John Tharp Jr. dismissed Halim’s claims, ruling that his argument simply did not “meat” the mark.</p><p>“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,” Tharp wrote.</p><p>Tharp went on to say that while Halim had standing to bring the claim, having presented enough evidence to suggest he suffered a financial loss, he failed to show that a reasonable consumer would be misled by Buffalo Wild Wings' use of the term “boneless wings.”</p><p>The Atlanta-based company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.</p><p>Tharp said Halim has until March 20 to amend his complaint but said that it would be difficult to overturn the ruling.</p>",
  "title": "Judge rules there's 'no meat' to Chicago man's 'boneless' wings lawsuit",
  "updatedAt": "2026-02-18T22:50:11.017Z"
}