Are Boneless Wings Actually Wings? U.S. District Court Makes Its Ruling

It feels like we went about half a decade yelling at each other about whether a hot dog is a sandwich, and while that debate has valid arguments to be made from both sides, it took away from another food debate that shouldn't actually be a debate to begin with involving what constitutes a chicken wing.

Personally, I think we as a nation took a step backwards when we started introducing a breaded piece of chicken drenched in sauce as a ‘boneless wing.’ Then again, I can recognize that ‘boneless wing’ is easier to say and market than something like ‘chicken chunk with sauce’ would be.

If you're a red-blooded American man who orders boneless wings instead of traditional wings, just know that I, and plenty of others, instantly lose an ounce of respect for you. Napkins were invented for a reason.

As for the debate over whether a boneless wing is or should be considered a chicken wing, a person named Aimen Halim sought a legitimate court ruling on the matter, and got one.

(Photo by Rick Diamond/Getty Images for Buffalo Wild Wings)

Halim sued Buffalo Wild Wings in March 2023, alleging that the chicken wing chain was falsely advertising boneless wings as wings, and even claimed the product should be called something like "chicken poppers." He came to this conclusion while claiming in the lawsuit that he went to a Buffalo Wild Wings in January 2023 and expected to receive "wings that were deboned" after placing his order.

On Tuesday, District Judge John Tharp Jr. made a ruling on the matter and even managed to sneak a chicken joke in his 10-page ruling.

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

"Halim did not 'drum' up enough factual allegations to state a claim," Tharp added. "Though he has standing to bring the claim because he plausibly alleged economic injury, he does not plausibly allege that reasonable consumers are fooled by Buffalo Wild Wings' use of the term 'boneless wings.'"

While Judge Tharp could have completely blown up the vernacular seen on menus across the country with a ruling in the opposite direction, which would have certainly been something, you can't fault him for ruling that boneless wings aren't fooling anyone.