toll free: (800) 442-6546
local: (312) 346-8780

protecting the rights of injured workers


  • Ban the Box

    Governor Quinn recently signed the Job Opportunities for Qualified Applicants Act, AKA “Ban the Box,” which prohibits many employers from requiring that applicants list their criminal history on job applications. The law requires application forms to be amended to ensure legal compliance. Employers are also forbidden to conduct background checks on prospective employees until a position is offered to an applicant. Applicants cannot be asked to disclose criminal history until the interview phase. If there is no interview, employers may not inquire about criminal records until there is a conditional offer of employment to the applicant. Hiring processes should also be revisited and revised as neededo) that have passed “ban the box” legislation; the name is based on the box found on most employment applications that asks applicants whether they have ever been convicted of a crime.

    The Job Opportunities for Qualified Applicants Act, which takes effect January 1, 2015, prohibits private employers with 15 or more employees, as well as all employment agencies, from asking about, requiring disclosure of, or considering an applicant’s criminal history, until the employer/employment agency has decided that the applicant is qualified for the job and they have notified the applicant of his or her selection for an interview or – if there is no interview – until a conditional job offer has been made. These restrictions do not apply if:

    (1) Employers must exclude applicants with certain criminal convictions from an applied-for position under federal or Illinois law (in which case the employer may notify applicants in writing of the specific disqualifying offenses);

    (2) A standard fidelity or equivalent bond is required, and an applicant’s conviction of one or more specific offenses would disqualify him or her from obtaining such a bond (in which case the employer may ask the applicant if he or she has been convicted of any such offenses); or

    (3) The position is one that requires licensing under the Emergency Medical Services Systems Act.


    The Illinois Department of Labor is charged with investigating any alleged violations and imposing civil penalties ranging from a written warning for a first violation and up to $1,500 for a repeated violation or a failure to remedy an earlier violation. The law does not allow applicants themselves to sue.


    The Illinois law reemphasizes the fact that multi-state employers should remove criminal history questions from their job applications, especially if they use nationwide Internet-based job postings to reach applicants. In addition, every employer should work closely with its employment counsel to make sure it complies with these new and developing laws in every jurisdiction where they recruit. Employers should also keep in mind that certain states have additional laws that regulate this area, such as Illinois’ Human Rights Act, which prohibits using arrest-record information or expunged criminal convictions when making employment decisions.


  • Lawyers for multiple small companies have accused search engine giant Google Inc. of stealing from their clients’ trade secrets.

    In the past lawyers for multiple small companies have accused search engine giant Google Inc. of stealing and profiting from their clients’ trade secrets. In the case of VSL Communications, their lawyers claim that Google did the same thing; in fact they left a paper trail of the ubiquitous Post-it notes as evidence.

    London-based VSL Communications accused Google of stealing its proprietary method for shrinking video and audio files without any sacrifice in the sound or image quality. The suit, filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court in August, claims that Google used those trade secrets to enhance all of Google’s streaming and downloading including YouTube, Google Play and Google Earth.

    The complaint alleges that Google coerced VSL into handing over its technology by claiming to be interested in acquiring the company. A Google executive contacted VSL’s CEO to discuss the possibility of buying VSL’s video streaming and downloading technology. After talking for over eight months everything came to a standstill, VSL decided the deal was not going to go through and asked Google to return its intellectual property. Google did return the property but the files were now covered with Post-it notes; Google insiders appear to have written notes ranging from how to use of VSL’s technology as well as suggestions that Google employees delete their emails and ignore any possibility of infringement.

    Adam Levitt, of Grant & Eisenhofer in Chicago, is the lead attorney working alongside of attorneys from Texas and in San Francisco. YouTube and On2 Technologies, which Google acquired, have been named as additional defendants.

    Google had refused to pay royalties to use the data compression standard that was the standard at the time, and was covered by a patent owned by MPEG LA. Google purchased On2, based in , for approximately $124.6 million with the hope that they would be able to help Google create its own compression technology, but Google’s video quality was still behind its competitors. According to the complaint, Google “was in desperate need of improvement.”


    After Google signed a nondisclosure agreement, VSL provided the Google team with three CDs that contained working versions of its technology, 400 files and photocopies of additional VSL trade secrets as well as charts comparing the VSL technology with that of its competitors’. The complaint states that VSL did not know that”… behind the scenes, Google had devised a scheme to steal the VSL trade secrets and incorporate them into Google’s own products without compensating VSL for their use.”


    When the VSL Google talks ended, VSL demanded the return of its files. The returned documents were covered with incriminating Post-it notes that had apparently been left behind by Google employees. Attorney Adam Levitt claims that the notes said, among other things, that Google might possibly be infringing VSL’s then-pending patent and that Google should “keep an eye” on VSL’s technology and sweep it into a Google patent. In addition, notes warned Google engineers not to be caught “digging deep” and to “close eyes to existing IP.”


    The complaint alleges that Google began to amend its preexisting patent applications and file new applications using VSL’s technology. Then in early 2012, VSL noticed that there were significant improvements to the video quality of Google’s Android operating system as well as other Google software. In June, the staff at VSL analyzed Google’s publicly available code only to discover that the code contained VSL trade secrets. Levitt asserts that the “Defendants’ theft of VSL’s trade secrets pervades virtually every website and product offered by defendants.”


  • Back -to- School 2014

    In mid-August Jewel-Osco announced that its computers, containing credit and debit card information, had suffered an “unlawful intrusion”. They are but the latest retailer to do so with the list that now includes CVS, Home Depot, Neiman Marcus, Shaws, Sears, Supervalu, Target and Walgreens. When Target announced earlier this year that its credit and customer records had been hacked, it was a pivotal moment for data security.

    Retailers jumped to upgrade and protect their systems. They joined a growing chorus, including data security companies, payment processors and lawmakers on Capitol Hill, calling for better standards and technology to safeguard data. Target, after acknowledging that as many as 110 million customers had personal information and card data stolen, said it would speed up its adoption of more secure payment technology. Suddenly, banks were being pressured to issue customers new cards with microchips, a technology that has been successfully used in Europe for more than 20 years. Congressional committees asked, with urgency, what more could be done.


    The multidistrict litigation against Target Corporation, over last year’s massive data breach is at the starting line, with the first consolidated class action that was filed the beginning of August. The complaint was filed on behalf of thousands of financial institutions asserting losses of as much as $18 billion when hackers stole credit and debit card information and other personal data affecting 110 million customers during the holiday season. The costs were incurred in reissuing cards, reimbursing customers and changing or canceling accounts.


    Missing from the complaint were claims under the U.S. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). Plaintiffs’ attorney in Beaumont, Texas, who represents three financial institutions, has argued in favor of bringing RICO claims and has asked the court’s permission to file individual lawsuits on behalf of his clients rather than join the class action. A separate consolidated complaint, filed on behalf of consumers who brought the bulk of the 140 cases against Target, is due the end of August.


    Target, which named Brian Cornell as its new chief executive officer in July, blamed $148 million in continuing expenses related to the breach in part for what it said would be disappointing news in its quarterly shareholder report.


    In court, Target unsuccessfully tried to halt discovery in the litigation until Magnuson rules on its motions to dismiss, due on September 1st and October 1st. In a July motion, Wendy Wildung, representing Target in the litigation process, said that Target believes it has a “substantial likelihood” of obtaining a dismissal. In the letter, she cited a JulyU.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois decision that dismissed a data-breach lawsuit against Michaels Stores Inc. U.S. District Judge Elaine Bucklo ruled that the plaintiffs couldn’t show that they suffered direct “economic damage” from a breach last year that compromised 2.6 million customer credit and debit card numbers. Plaintiffs in data-breach actions against Barnes & Noble Inc., LinkedIn Corp., Sam’s Club and Aetna Inc. have all received similar rulings.



    The Target data breach may have been the one of the more public experiences, occurring during the holiday shopping season, the underlying conversation is this threat has become increasingly prevalent. Technology experts say that companies need to take the steps to protect their networks against hackers and protect the data they gather from customers by establishing layers of security measures to prevent criminals from gaining access to their networks as well as monitoring them when they do break-in and diverting them to nonessential data. Data hackers are increasingly operating like businesses, with criminal networks selling our identities as their product.


  • Gun Store Law in Chicago

    Despite being forced to allow gun sales by a federal judge, the Chicago City Council approved a legislation that would significantly limit locations at which gun stores could be opened.  Gun store owners are being made aware that the city government will be checking up on them every time they sell a gun.

    Mayor Rahm Emanuel and the Chicago aldermen made it clear that they only allowed the opening of gun shops because a federal judge ruled that the city’s ban on stores that sell weapons was unconstitutional.

    Aldermen have also listed some provisions – many of which will be challenged in court — such as a requirement that all gun sales be recorded on video and another that forces gun owners to open their books for inspection by the law enforcement. There are also restrictions on locations where the gun shops can be opened at, effectively prohibiting them in huge areas of the city; they are confined to specific areas and cannot be opened within 500 feet of schools and parks.

    Unsurprisingly, this does not sit well with gun right advocates. Richard Pearson, executive director of the Illinois State Rifle Association, called this law “an ordinance to prevent gun shops”. The City, having fought for decades to keep guns unavailable to its residents, faced numerous lawsuits because of that and will almost certainly face another one.

    The Mayor disagreed, adding that the city’s legal department examined the ordinance and decided that it has a solid legal basis. He claims that the city has written a “solid, tough and enforceable ordinance.” Although he didn’t talk about the provision that requires videotaping, earlier he stated that the practice is not any different than that of photographing transactions at ATMs.

    This ordinance also affects the so called straw purchasers. These are the people who buy guns and transfer them to people who are not allowed to buy or possess firearms. According to the police, that is the major reason of a flood of illegal guns into Chicago and why the Chicago police department seizes more illegal guns than any other city in the country. According to the Alderman James Balcer, “The ordinance, will allow employees to be trained to identify straw purchasers.” The ordinance also does not permit the buyers to purchase more than one gun every 30 days – this is supposed to be a hindrance for straw purchasers who prefer to buy multiple firearms at one time.

    As lawsuits are sure to be filed in response to this the ordinance that was approved in July 2014, Chicago will remain the center of the national debate over gun control. In 2012, a Federal Appeals court in Chicago ruled that Illinois’ last-in-the-nation ban on concealed weapons was unconstitutional. Mayor Emanuel was quoted that, while he’s not welcoming a lawsuit, it is important to pass the toughest possible ordinance, regardless if it prompts a legal challenge. “You have to do what you think is right,”.


  • “Arising Out Of” Employment

    The purpose of the Workers’ Compensation Act (Act) is to protect employees against risks and hazards which are particularly characteristics to the specific work they have been employed to do. An injury is compensable under the Act only if it “arises out of” and “in the course of” the employment. The phrase “in the course of” refers to the time, place and circumstances under which the accident occurred. The words “arising out of” refer to the origin or cause of the accident and assume that there is a causal connection between the employment and the injury. An injury “arises out of” the employment if it originates from a risk connected with, or incidental to, her /his job. Both of these elements must be present at the time of the accident or injury to justify compensation.

    Jane Brais worked for the Kankakee County Circuit Clerk’s Office as a child support coordinator. On the day of her accident, Brais was returning to her office at the courthouse from a work-related meeting at a nearby administrative building. Brais and other employees normally used the employee’s entrance at the rear of the courthouse. However, the entrance was locked, which meant she had to use the main entrance instead.

    As she neared the main entrance stairs, she caught the heel of her shoe in a sidewalk defect and fell;  the sidewalk where she fell had huge cracks and was broken up. Brais testified, “You could pretty much see the gravel that they put down underneath the concrete.” She further testified there was a one-half to a one inch difference in the level between the smooth concrete and the crumbled concrete.

    Brais filed her claim against Kankakee County, and the arbitrator denied it. According to the arbitrator, Brais’ accident “occurred when she was walking along a public pathway going in to the county courthouse.” He added, “In doing so, she was not subjected to a risk to which the general public is not exposed or that was peculiar to her work.” The arbitrator found that the risk to the claimant which caused her injuries was no greater to her than to the general public.

    The Brais case found that the employee’s presence on the sidewalk approaching the steps to the courthouse’s front door was based on the demands of her employment, which had required her to attend a meeting in the administration building two blocks from her office. The court noted that her attendance at the meeting was solely for the benefit and accommodation of her employer.

    According to the appellate court, when an employee is injured in an area which is the sole or usual route to the employer’s premises, and there is a special risk or hazard on the route, the hazard becomes part of the employment. The court found that the special hazards or risk encountered as a result of using the sole or usual access route satisfied the “arising out of” requirement in the Act. The appellate court noted that the front entrance to the courthouse “was not only a usual access route for the claimant, it was her sole and only route since the employee entrance was locked.” Because she was required to attend the meeting at the administrative building, Brais’ risk of injury on the defective sidewalk was greater than that of the general public.

    The Brais Court said, “this case does not merely involve the risks inherent in walking on a sidewalk which confront all members of the public. This case involves a cracked and defective sidewalk which was a contributing cause of the claimant’s injury. Because the claimant encountered a special hazard or risk as a result of using a sole or usual access route, her injury arose out of her employment.” The court said “Application of the existing case law to the undisputed facts in this case reveals that the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from the evidence is that the claimant’s injuries arose out of her employment.”

    The appellate court, in writing its opinion, was careful to state that the hazard becomes part of the employment only when an employee is injured in an area which is “the sole or usual route to the employer’s premises, and there is a special risk or hazard on the route.”


  • E – cigarettes

    The State of Illinois continues in its efforts to protect nonsmokers, children and students from the dangers of smoking. In the past month, Governor Quinn has signed new laws regulating the way electronic cigarettes can be sold. The new law requires that all e-cigarettes must be sold from behind a counter, in a sealed case or in an age-restricted area. The law will also make it illegal to sell e-cigarettes from a self-service display. That law goes into effect on January 1st 2015. Another law that takes effect on the same day will prohibit the sale of e-cigarettes to anyone under age 18.

    Quinn also signed legislation, which takes effect on July 1, 2015, banning indoors and outdoors smoking on all Illinois public college and university campuses including all state-supported schools. The bill was sponsored by state Sen. Terry Link of Waukegan and state Rep. Ann Williams of Chicago. Several Illinois college campuses, including the University of Illinois at its Champaign-Urbana and Chicago, already have smoke-free policies in place. Smoking would still be allowed inside of privately owned vehicles and during activities protected by the federal American Indian Religious Freedom Act.

    Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, along with 28 other state attorneys general, recently submitted comments to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on its proposed e-cigarette rules. They urged the federal government to strengthen its proposed regulations for electronic cigarettes to include a ban on the sale of flavored products claiming that flavored e-cigarettes attract children and teenagers to the products. They also want the FDA to make e-cigarette advertising and marketing follow the same restrictions as tobacco products.

    Even Congress has become involved with 12 Senate Democrats proposing a law that would require child-proof bottles for the liquid nicotine used for e-cigarettes. The American Association of Poison Control Centers stated that toxic exposure to e-cigarette devices and liquid nicotine has risen from 271 in 2011 to more than 2,300 this year.

    Locally, Mayor Rahm Emanuel is being urged to extend his ban on smoking to include Chicago parks. While Chicago beaches and playgrounds are smoke-free, the parks do not have a similar ban. Chicago has earned a reputation for driving residents to quit, with the ban on e-cigarettes in any location that also bans smoking, disallowing sales to minors and banning all flavored tobacco product sales within 500 feet of schools. These and other measures such as one of the higher national taxes on cigarettes, has worked as smoking by Chicago high school students has gone from 13. 6 percent on 2011 to 10.7 percent in 2013 and the adult smoking rate has dropped to 17.7 percent down from 22.6 percent.

    Health officials have praised these new laws aimed at reducing smoking rates,“Today is really about driving people to quit smoking.”


  • General Motors Has Set A New Precedence For Auto Recalls This Year

    General Motors (GM) has set a new precedence for auto recalls this year, as the first cavalcade of auto recalls quickly turned the safety notices into background noise ignored by many of the effected car owners. GM started the avalanche on February 2014, when they announced that they had to fix a fatally flawed ignition switch on some of their small cars. That was quickly expanded twice and now numbers 2.6 million cars worldwide. The defect is linked to 13 deaths and 54 accidents.

    Hoping to clean house and avoid more government fines for recall foot-dragging, GM has announced 38 recalls this year through June, covering 14.4 million U.S. vehicles. GM alone will far exceed the past decade’s annual auto industry average of 21 million cars and light trucks.

    GM’s stepped-up recall pace could continue into midsummer, said GM Executive Vice President Mark Reuss. In the past month, GM had announced four more recalls, with the largest for 464,712 Chevrolet Camaros. The Camaro ignition key can be bumped out of position, a problem linked to three crashes and four minor injuries.

    Meanwhile, other automakers are clearing their cupboards of safety-related issues to stay out of the sights of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is promising tougher oversight to prevent a repeat of GM’s 13-year dawdling before the switch was recalled. So far this year, other auto manufacturers have announced 47 recalls, covering 8.54 million U.S. vehicles, according to government records. That’s a lot, even though it seems otherwise when contrasted with GM’s overwhelming numbers.

    The millions of recalls that have been issued this year made the situation worse and owner response rates even lower. The typical consumer reaction seems to be, “My car’s running fine. Do I need to bother?” The fact is, car owners should be bothered, but getting them to grasp that fact is a bit like trying to push a piece of string.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) stated that about 75% of recalled vehicles eventually get fixed, depending upon the value and age of the vehicle, how serious the problem seems and how likely the owner thinks that the issue might effect their vehicle. The agency believes toning down recall commotion would hurt, not help; safety is their number one concern and they want to increase and improve ways to reach consumers, not limit the number of recalls.

    It’s easy to see why car companies are quicker to pull the recall trigger on issues now when in the past they might have studied them longer. They do not want lawsuits such as those piling up against GM or a Justice Department criminal investigation such as GM’s or even a Securities and Exchange Commission probe that looked at whether GM was truthful with its investors. So far, GM has announced $1.6 billion in charges against its earnings for the first two quarters in order to pay for the recalls.

    Some less immediately life-threatening issues might takes months to be fixed as dealers wait for the parts needed to repair the problems. Owners must either trust that the problems are not life threatening or leave their vehicles at the dealership for weeks, incurring the expense of rental cars, taxis and altered plans. Affected owners should be aware that they may need to consider seeking legal redress for economic damages including the costs associated with repairs as well as a decline in the resale value of the effected vehicles.

    In a roundabout way, recalls can improve overall auto safety beyond the recalled and repaired cars. Good dealers can turn recalls into sales of new cars with the latest safety features as they have an influx of customers waiting for their recall repairs to be completed. With the assistance of qualified salespeople this can turn a misfortune into a major sales opportunity.

  • Traffic Ticket Quotas

    The policy of assigning quotas for the number of traffic tickets each officer must issue officially ended in Illinois after Gov. Pat Quinn signed legislation in June. This is good news for some drivers but ending the policy could have an effect on how Illinois police are evaluated as well as how much money some municipalities will earn from ticketing motorists.

    In many jurisdictions, ticket quotas were one of those traditions like doughnuts – always around but hidden in a drawer and not on the top of the desk where visitors might be able to see them. Quotas do have an upside for municipalities as traffic tickets generate income through fines. They also serve as an easy performance-measuring device for supervisors in police departments, since ticket numbers are verifiable. But the practice drew the fury of drivers who would often complain – unsuccessfully – that they were victims of an arbitrary rush on the part of police to meet a numerical goal. Some drivers argued that the number of tickets had risen at one point as a means of building public pressure to resolve tense labor negotiations between the police union and the city.

    Quinn was noted as saying that the law, which was overwhelmingly backed by both houses of the legislature, will allow police to exercise judgment when deciding whether to ticket a driver rather than simply pursuing a fixed number of citations during every shift. The law, which immediately went into effect, applies to local, county and state law enforcement officers.

    Law enforcement officers should have discretion on when and where to issue traffic citations and not be forced to ticket motorists to satisfy a quota system the Governor said in a news release; “This new law will improve safety and working conditions for police officers and prevent motorists from facing unnecessary anxiety when they encounter a police vehicle.”

    The Illinois law applies to the range of citations that police issue, including parking, speeding and other functions. It also specifically bars municipalities from using the number of tickets issued by an officer in their performance reviews. In a statement in April, as the measure was still being discussed, John H. Kennedy, executive director of the Illinois Assn. of Chiefs of Police, issued a statement opposing the bill.

    While law enforcement executives strongly agree with eliminating the imposition of arbitrary traffic ticket quotas, the bill also eliminated vital data-driven performance measures used to assist in the performance appraisal of police officers. This bill could essentially strip the ability of law enforcement leaders to establish expectations for officers and to hold officers accountable for certain minimum performance standards. The bill does address the concerns of drivers who felt that law enforcement officers had arbitrarily targeted them in order to maintain their ticket quotas.



  • Boating Safety Issues

    Most people already knows that drinking alcohol and driving a car is a dangerous combination, however, there is less awareness of the same dangers while operating a boat. Mix water, a boat and throw in alcohol and the results can be deadly.

    That’s why Governor Pat Quinn signed new legislation in July to improve boating safety. “This is something that never should have happened, there should have been more enforcement out there,” Jim Borcia said. Their 10-year-old son Tony was killed two years ago on the Chain-of-Lakes while tubing with his family. A boater, operating his boat while under the influence of alcohol and cocaine, ran the boy over as his family watched in horror. Tony and his family frantically waved their hands to the boater to get his attention, but he never slowed down. Tony’s family used their tragedy to change laws.

    “We know there are other Tonys out there that are in danger every weekend, every day, said Jim Borcia. “Unless things change, the mindset of boats shouldn’t be associated with partying, it should be associated with responsibility.” Since the tragic accident, the family has created the Y-Not Project in Tony’s name, and raised enough money to buy a boat for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources to patrol the Chain-of-Lakes.

    In July, Gov. Quinn signed three new bills into law to increase boating safety. The first law will make punishment for boating under the influence more in line with driving other vehicles under the influence. The next bill will require boaters 16 and younger to pass a boating safety course and have a valid certificate, and the third law will require the operator of any boat to display a bright orange flag if they are towing a person. “From a little boy’s death has come the beginning of reform for boating safety in Illinois,” Morrison said. “Part of your pain has been turned into purpose,” she said to his parents, who have been pushing for changes in boating laws since his death.

    The bills, signed in July, increase the power of law enforcement officials and put new restrictions and requirements on boaters. Under one of them, a persons’ watercraft can be seized after multiple DUI offenses. In another, all people born after January 1998 will be required to take a boater safety course and hold a boater safety certificate before they can operate a boat with an engine over 10 horsepower, according to Quinn’s office.

    The final bill requires any watercraft towing a person to display a bright orange flag no less than 12 inches per side in size. In 2014 so far, there have been 16 boating fatalities reported on Illinois waterways. It is hoped that these new laws will help to reduce that number during the boating season on the local waterways.

  • Juveniles Records Expunged

    Juveniles are now able to get their records expunged because of the new “Clean Slate” law. The new law will now expunge the arrests records of many teens with minor offenses.

    Juveniles who were arrested for non-violent crimes, for less serious reasons or never actually charged, will automatically get a clean slate as soon as they turn 18. Lawyers and state officials say this law will help these kids get into schools and get jobs without arrest records hanging over their heads.

    Private corporations are able to buy or mine data from local jurisdictions all over the country, not just here in Illinois. Employers are using the data from young people with minor offenses in order to turn them down for jobs that are often completely unrelated to their juvenile records.

    The “Clean Slate” law will help keep young adults from being pigeonholed by something they did in their teenage years and that should have remained a part of their juvenile records.

    The legislation stipulates that the teen can’t have been criminally charged, and the arrest can’t be tied to felonies or sex assault cases.

    Youth Courts have been established downstate as a way to keep kids out of criminal court proceedings. The arrest record would be cleared by a person’s 18th birthday if that arrest didn’t result in criminal charges.  Eligible juveniles must also not have any other subsequent arrests or juvenile delinquency petitions.

    This isn’t the first change seen from the State when it comes to juvenile offenders. The entire department is undergoing an overhaul, primarily to cut costs by keeping kids out of the system.

    This bill will give teens a second chance to get onto the right path. It is another tool that gives a minor, and future adult, the ability to be in a positive position as they’re starting college or entering the workforce.




  • Subscribe to this blog’s feed




    ankin law office llc

    162 West Grand Avenue
    Chicago, Illinois 60654
    Toll Free: 800-442-6546
    Local: 312-346-8780

    icon icon icon

    Our firm handles workers' compensation and personal injury claims in Chicago, Berwyn, Joliet, Cicero, Waukegan, Chicago Heights, Elgin, Aurora, Oak Park, Oak Lawn, Schaumburg, Bolingbrook, Glendale Heights, Aurora, Niles, Schaumburg, Arlington Heights, Naperville, Plainfield and all of Cook, DuPage, Lake, Will, McHenry, LaSalle, Kankakee, McLean and Peoria Counties.