Advocate Health Care Network v. Specworks Inc.

Summary

Advocate Health Care Network sues Specworks Inc. for trademark infringement over allegedly conflicting marks.

Summary generated by AI from public docket data. Verify against the original filing before relying on it.

Coverage vs reality meter

Cause

15:44 Trademark Infringement

Entities in this case

Parties

Advocate Aurora Health, Inc. (plaintiff) Advocate Health Care Network (plaintiff) Corina Peacock (defendant) Specworks Inc. (defendant)

Docket entries

1. #1302026-09-01

   MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Steven C. Seeger on 9/1/2026. For the foregoing reasons, Advocate Health's motion to dismiss the counterclaims (Dckt. No. 37 ) is granted in part and denied in part. All of the counterclaims are dismissed, with two exceptions. First, the counterclaim for breach of contract survives to the extent that SpecWorks alleges a failure to pay invoices. Second, the counterclaim for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage survives to the limited extent that it involves misrepresentations to the employees about whether SpecWorks was an authorized source for authentic merchandise. Mailed notice. (jjr, )

2. #1292026-08-31

   Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

3. #1282026-08-27

   Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

4. #1272026-08-27

   Order on Motion for Order AND Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney AND Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

5. 2026-08-27

   Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

6. #1242026-08-07

   Order on Motion to Substitute Attorney AND Order on Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

7. #1232026-08-04

   Substitute Attorney

8. #1202026-06-10

   Withdraw as Attorney

9. #1122026-05-27

   Extension of Time to Complete Discovery

10. #1112026-05-26

    Order on Motion for Discovery

11. #1102026-05-22

    Discovery

12. #1092026-04-29

    MINUTE entry before the Honorable Albert Berry III: Motion and status hearing held on 4/28/26. Plaintiff's motion [ 95, 96 ] is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff's motion raised 10 issues (as stated in the motion AJ). As to Part A, Plaintiff's motion is denied. Though defendant answered interrogatories 4 days late, the Court, through the use of its broad discretion and finding of good cause, denies Plaintiff's request to deem Defendant's objections waived.As to Issues BJ, Plaintiff seeks various documents related to requests for production, interrogatories, and a privilege log. As discussed in open court and on the record, the Court orders Defendant to respond to these requests and certify that there has been a diligent search for these materials by 5/13/26. If any documents are not in Defendant's possession, custody, or control, Defendant must certify that fact by 5/13/26.The fact discovery deadline is 5/28/26 100 . Pursuant to the current referral [ 106, 107 ], the Court will review all discovery motions; however, motions relating to the discovery deadline must be heard by the District Court. Before filing any discovery motions, the parties should familiarize themselves with Judge Berry III's Case Procedures on Discovery Motions (available on the Court's website), which require a face-to-face meet and confer before any discovery motions are filed (video conferencing will satisfy this requirement). The parties are ordered to file a joint status report by 5/29/26 informing the Court whether expert discovery is necessary and, if so, proposing a schedule, and whether they believe a settlement conference would be fruitful at that time. Emailed notice (yt) (Entered: 04/29/2026)

13. #1082026-04-07

    MINUTE entry before the Honorable Albert Berry III: An in-person motion hearing is set for Plaintiff's fully briefed Motion to Compel [ 95, 96 ] on 4/28/26 at 10:45 a.m. in Courtroom 2214. Emailed notice (yt) (Entered: 04/07/2026)

14. #1072026-04-06

    Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Albert Berry, III for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery motion(s); motion to compel, 95 & 96 .(jjr, )Mailed notice. (Entered: 04/06/2026)

15. #1062026-04-06

    MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the motion to compel. (Dckt. Nos. 95, 96 ) The Court hereby refers this case for discovery supervision and all discovery motions, including protective orders, to the designated Magistrate Judge. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) (Entered: 04/06/2026)

16. #1052026-04-06

    MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The motion to seal (Dckt. No. 94 ) is hereby granted. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) (Entered: 04/06/2026)

17. #1042026-03-26

    MINUTE entry before the Honorable Albert Berry III: Defendant/Counter Claimant Specworks, Inc. and Defendant Corina Peacock have informed the Plaintiff/Counter Defendants Advocate Health Care Network and Advocate Aurora Health, Inc., and the Court that they do not accept the last demand/offer and the case is not settled. The case was referred to the Magistrate Judge for settlement only [ 28, 29 ]. Therefore, the referral is terminated. The case is returned to the assigned District Judge for further proceedings. Emailed notice (yt) (Entered: 03/26/2026)

18. #1032026-03-20

    REPLY by Plaintiffs Advocate Aurora Health, Inc., Advocate Health Care Network to motion to compel,, 95 (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Defs Supp RFP Responses, # 2 Exhibit B - Email re Meet and Confer, # 3 Exhibit C - Defs Supp Interrogatory Responses, # 4 Exhibit D - SW002059-2094 and SW002126)(Stahl, Christian) (Entered: 03/20/2026)

19. 2025-03-07

    CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (cvk, )

20. 2025-03-07

    CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (cvk, )

Docket history from CourtListener/RECAP — most recent first.