2026年2月18日 / 美国东部时间上午10:15 / CBS新闻
伊利诺伊州一名法官裁定，水牛城辣鸡翅（Buffalo Wild Wings）连锁餐厅一名顾客提起的关于”无骨鸡翅”的诉讼”毫无根据”。
艾米恩·哈利姆（Aimen Halim）于2023年起诉水牛城辣鸡翅，声称该连锁店使用”无骨鸡翅”一词具有欺骗性，因为其含有鸡胸肉。法庭文件显示，哈利姆于2023年1月在伊利诺伊州一家门店订购了”无骨鸡翅”，原以为会收到”去骨鸡翅”。
文件称，如果他知道自己吃的是鸡胸肉，就会拒绝购买或只付更少的钱。哈利姆要求获得经济赔偿。
周二，美国伊利诺伊州北区联邦地区法院法官小约翰·瑟普（John Tharp Jr.）驳回了哈利姆的诉讼请求，在其判决意见中指出，原告未能”充分举证”支持其主张。
瑟普表示，”无骨鸡翅”一词并不具有欺骗性，而是一个”富有想象力的名称”。他写道，词语可以有多种含义，以”水牛城辣鸡翅”为例，他指出该词”指的是鸡翅上的酱汁类型，而不是指用水牛的肉制成”。
“一个理性的消费者不会认为水牛城辣鸡翅的无骨鸡翅是真正去骨的鸡翅，被重新加工成某种怪异的鸡翅，”瑟普说道。
瑟普还将该产品与水牛城辣鸡翅销售的另一种产品——花椰菜鸡翅（cauliflower wings）进行了比较，指出理性的顾客不会认为这道菜是用鸡翅肉制成的。
随后，在其判决意见中，瑟普称”无骨鸡翅”是一个已有二十多年历史的常用术语，顾客对此很熟悉。
法庭文件称，水牛城辣鸡翅同样表示，理性的消费者不会被”无骨鸡翅”一词误导，”上下文线索明确表明该产品不可能由鸡翅肉制成”。
截至发稿，连锁餐厅和原告律师尚未立即回应置评请求。
瑟普周二表示，哈利姆需在3月20日前提交修正诉状。
Judge says lawsuit over Buffalo Wild Wings boneless wings has “no meat on its bones”
February 18, 2026 / 10:15 AM EST / CBS News
An Illinois judge ruled that a Buffalo Wild Wings customer’s lawsuit over the restaurant chain’s boneless chicken has “no meat on its bones.”
Aimen Halim sued Buffalo Wild Wings in 2023, alleging that its use of the term “boneless wings” is deceptive because it contains chicken breast meat. According to court documents, Halim ordered the “boneless wings” at an Illinois location in January 2023, expecting to receive “wings that were deboned.”
Had he known he was eating breast meat, Halim would have refused to buy the product or paid less, the documents say. Halim sought monetary damages.
On Tuesday, Judge John Tharp Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois rejected Halim’s claims, riffing in his opinion that the plaintiff did not “drum” up enough facts to support his claim.
Tharp said the term “boneless wings” is not deceptive but rather a “fanciful name.” He wrote that words can have multiple meanings, using the example of “buffalo wing,” which he said “refers to the type of sauce on the wing, rather than indicating it is made of buffalo meat.”
“A reasonable consumer would not think that BWW’s boneless wings were truly deboned chicken wings, reconstituted into some sort of Franken-wing,” Tharp said.
Tharp also compared the item to cauliflower wings, another product sold at Buffalo Wild Wings, noting that a reasonable customer would not believe the dish is made from wing meat.
Later, in his opinion, Tharp stated that “boneless wings” is a common term that has been in use for over two decades and is familiar to customers.
Buffalo Wild Wings likewise said that a reasonable consumer would not be misled by the term “boneless wings” and that “context clues make it clear that the product cannot be made of wing meat,” the opinion says.
The restaurant chain and the plaintiff’s lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Tharp said Tuesday that Halim has until March 20 to file an amended complaint.
发表回复