⚠Independent criticism site. Not affiliated with Buc-ee’s, Ltd. Who would want to be, anyway?
Fuck-ee’s logo
Tracking Buc-ee’s Lawsuits Against Small Businesses
The receipts are being seen Total site visits
25

Buc-ee’s Loves Suing the Little Guys

A list of trademark lawsuits Buc-ee’s has filed against small, independent businesses.Big beaver. Small heart.

Browse the cases
Generic cartoon beaver with a prohibition slash

BOYCOTT BUC-EE’S

They’ve got billions and a legal army. Let’s support the little guys instead. Spend your money at independent travel stops and local businesses, not at a corporate bully.Support local. Stand up. Fight back.

See the receipts
🗓July 2026
Beaver’s Mini Mart (Ohio)
New case targeting the store’s name, beaver mascot, and red branding.
View Case
Pending Filed July 28, 2026 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio
Case: Search by party name

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s alleges that the store’s “Beaver’s” name, smiling beaver character, and red elements are likely to create an association with Buc-ee’s.

Outcome / current status

No answer, merits ruling, settlement, or final outcome had been reported by August 4, 2026. Search PACER by party name in the Southern District of Ohio rather than relying on a guessed case number.

Official PACER party searchOfficial S.D. Ohio ECF
🗓May 2026
Teddy’s Market
Motion to dismiss filed; no final merits ruling located as of Aug. 4, 2026.
View Case
Pending Filed May 1, 2026 · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia
Case: 1:26-cv-02478

What Buc-ee’s alleged

The complaint challenges Teddy’s name and bear-themed convenience-store branding as allegedly infringing or diluting Buc-ee’s marks.

Outcome / current status

The defendants moved to dismiss. The parties then briefed deadlines and responses; no final merits judgment was located as of August 4, 2026.

Official PACER docketOfficial N.D. Georgia ECF
🗓February 2026
Mickey’s / Coles IP Holdings (Ohio)
Mickey’s denied the core claims and counterclaimed; still unresolved.
View Case
Pending + counterclaims Filed February 18, 2026 · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio
Case: 3:26-cv-00414

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s alleges Mickey’s smiling moose logo and convenience-store branding create a likelihood of confusion with its beaver marks.

Outcome / current status

Mickey’s denied the core allegations and asserted counterclaims attacking Buc-ee’s theory and seeking relief of its own. No final judgment had been entered as of August 4, 2026.

Official PACER docketOfficial N.D. Ohio ECF
🗓May 2025
Born United (apparel company)
Scheduling and discovery activity; no final ruling or disclosed settlement found.
View Case
Pending Filed May 27, 2025 · U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina
Case: 2:25-cv-04537

What Buc-ee’s alleged

The suit challenges Born United merchandise and designs that Buc-ee’s says use confusingly similar wording, imagery, or references to its marks.

Outcome / current status

The case proceeded into scheduling and discovery. No final merits ruling or publicly disclosed settlement was located as of August 4, 2026.

Official PACER docketOfficial D.S.C. ECF
🗓May 2025
Prometheus Esoterica
Parody-merch case continued into mediation and case management activity.
View Case
Pending Filed May 29, 2025 · U.S. District Court, Middle District of Florida
Case: 6:25-cv-00944

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s challenges parody-style merchandise and alleges trademark infringement, dilution, and related claims.

Outcome / current status

The defendants answered; mediation and case-management activity followed. The docket reflected a later trial schedule rather than a final resolution.

Official PACER docketOfficial M.D. Florida ECF
🗓May 2025
Owl & Anchor
Stayed after a bankruptcy filing; final closure should be confirmed in PACER.
View Case
Bankruptcy stay / verify Filed May 29, 2025 · U.S. District Court, District of Arizona
Case: 2:25-cv-01873

What Buc-ee’s alleged

The complaint targeted parody or novelty merchandise that Buc-ee’s contended infringed or diluted its trademarks.

Outcome / current status

The case was stayed after a defendant’s bankruptcy filing. A court order contemplated dismissal on December 10, 2025 absent further action. Confirm the final closure entry directly in PACER.

Verify in official PACEROfficial D. Arizona ECF
🗓March 2025
Barc-ee’s (dog-park café)
The café later closed; final federal disposition needs PACER verification.
View Case
Disposition needs PACER Filed March 19, 2025 · U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri
Case: 6:25-cv-03060-BP

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s alleged that the “Barc-ee’s” name and dog-themed logo infringed or diluted its branding.

Outcome / current status

The café later announced that it was closing. A final merits ruling or publicly stated settlement terms were not located in the official free materials reviewed; use PACER for the definitive docket disposition.

Verify in official PACEROfficial W.D. Missouri ECF
🗓January 2025
Super Fuels
Public dockets mark the case terminated on April 24, 2025.
View Case
Terminated Filed January 10, 2025 · U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas
Case: 3:25-cv-00075

What Buc-ee’s alleged

The complaint challenged Super Fuels’ cartoon dog logo and branding as allegedly too similar to Buc-ee’s beaver mark.

Outcome / current status

Public docket indexes mark the federal case terminated on April 24, 2025. The freely available summaries reviewed did not disclose the terms, so the dismissal filings in PACER are the best source for the exact resolution.

Official PACER docketOfficial N.D. Texas ECF
🗓November 2024
Duckees Drive Thru / 2 Wiseman Enterprises
Reported settlement; dismissed with prejudice and terminated Oct. 22, 2025.
View Case
Settled / dismissed Filed November 15, 2024 · U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri
Case: 3:24-cv-05088

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s challenged the “Duckees” name and duck-character convenience-store branding under trademark and unfair-competition theories.

Outcome / current status

The parties reported a settlement in 2025. The action was dismissed with prejudice, and the docket was terminated on October 22, 2025. Public reporting did not disclose all settlement terms.

Official PACER docketOfficial W.D. Missouri ECF
🗓October 2021
Buky’s (Texas)
Filing is documented, but final federal disposition was not located in free sources.
View Case
Final terms not public here Filed October 20, 2021 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
Case: 4:21-cv-03455

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s claimed the “Buky’s” name and red-letter presentation were confusingly similar to its own convenience-store branding.

Outcome / current status

Freely available reporting documents the filing and the owner’s denial that he copied Buc-ee’s, but a reliable public description of the final federal disposition was not located for this update. PACER should be treated as controlling.

Verify in official PACEROfficial S.D. Texas ECF
🗓2017 transfer
Bucky’s / Bucks, Inc.
Court denied key Buc-ee’s injunction theories and narrowed the case.
View Opinion
Major court rulings Transferred to District of Nebraska in 2017 · U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska
Case: 8:17-cv-00287

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s asserted trademark and contract claims after Bucky’s expanded, arguing that prior agreements restricted the rival’s use and geographic growth.

Outcome / current status

The court rejected key Buc-ee’s theories, denied a preliminary injunction, and held that the agreement allowed Bucky’s to expand subject to steps intended to avoid confusion. It dismissed several claims while allowing a narrower notice-of-confusion contract theory to continue.

Official PACER docketOfficial GovInfo opinionsOfficial D. Nebraska ECF
🗓December 2015
Choke Canyon
One of Buc-ee’s clearest merits wins: infringement and dilution verdict.
View Opinion
Jury verdict for Buc-ee’s Filed December 2015 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
Case: 4:15-cv-03704

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s challenged multiple animal-logo designs used by Choke Canyon travel centers, asserting infringement, dilution, unfair competition, and related claims.

Outcome / current status

After pretrial rulings narrowed some claims, a jury in May 2018 found infringement and dilution. The resulting relief required changes to the challenged branding. This is one of the clearest merits victories for Buc-ee’s in the list.

Official PACER docketOfficial GovInfo opinionsOfficial S.D. Texas ECF
🗓July 2014
Frio Beaver / B&B Grocery
Reported settlement required the store to stop using the challenged logo.
View Case
Settled Filed July 3, 2014 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
Case: 4:14-cv-01844

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s claimed the Frio Beaver character and convenience-store presentation infringed and diluted its beaver marks.

Outcome / current status

The dispute settled in December 2014. Contemporary accounts reported that B&B Grocery agreed to stop using the challenged logo and mascot, after which the federal case was dismissed.

Official PACER docketOfficial S.D. Texas ECF
🗓March 2013
Chicks / Chicks Development Group
Dismissed while the parties completed settlement terms.
View Case
Settlement / dismissed Filed March 2013 · U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas
Case: 4:13-cv-00640

What Buc-ee’s alleged

Buc-ee’s challenged the name and chicken-based convenience-store branding under trademark and related theories.

Outcome / current status

The court dismissed the action while the parties completed a settlement. Public reporting at the time described them as working toward final settlement terms rather than receiving a merits verdict.

Official PACER docketOfficial S.D. Texas ECF