Are boneless wings legally wings? A judge just settled the question

"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."

"Halim did not 'drum' up enough factual allegations to state a claim. 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.'"

"In that case, the plaintiff was allegedly injured by a bone from a so-called 'boneless wing' getting lodged in his throat. However, the court ruled that under Ohio law, 'a reasonable consumer could have reasonably anticipated and guarded against the bone at issue', regardless of it being called 'boneless.'"

A customer sued Buffalo Wild Wings under the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act alleging that 'boneless wings' misrepresented the product and should be called 'chicken nuggets.' U.S. District Judge John Tharp dismissed the claim, finding 'boneless wings' to be a common term in widespread use for over two decades and not a niche product requiring extensive research. The judge concluded the plaintiff alleged economic injury but failed to plausibly show reasonable consumers would be deceived. The ruling cited an Ohio Supreme Court case holding that a reasonable consumer could anticipate and guard against a bone in a 'boneless wing.'

Read at Fast Company