Teresa Stanek Rea Takes Post as Patent Office Deputy Director

US Patent Office Director David Kappos has announced his new Deputy Director: longtime intellectual property law professional Teresa Stanek Rea. Ms. Rea is currently a partner at Crowell & Moring and was president of the AIPLA from 2008-2009 and was previously with Burns Doane. Ms. Rea replaces Sharon Barner who stepped-down this January after a short, but effective tenure.

Ms. Rea graduated from Wayne State Law School in 1980 and has been practicing patent law for over 25 years. Before that, she practiced as a pharmacist. Her technology focus has primarily been biotechnology. Her leadership in that area will be a welcome addition to the USPTO management team. In her role as AIPLA director, Ms. Rea has been involved in many of the recent major patent cases, including Tafas v. Kappos, Ariad v. Eli Lilly, Prometheus v. Mayo, and Cardiac v. St. Jude.

Joff Wild who edits the wonderful magazine IAM reported last week that Michelle Lee (Google’s IP Chief) and Shanna Winters (Congressional Counsel) were also under consideration for the post.

 

24 thoughts on “Teresa Stanek Rea Takes Post as Patent Office Deputy Director

  1. 24

    Non Sequitur of the day award goes to (once again) Sunchine Malcolm.

    Nice job homey – as if be quoted has anything to do with shiny buttons.

  2. 23

    even King Kappos be quoting me of late

    He likes the way you keep his buttons shiny, pingaling.

    Keep fluffin’!

  3. 22

    Cepts Sunshine – I done told ya – mine be not “inanity” – my observations be gold – even King Kappos be quoting me of late.

    Funny with all the massive amount of be othciin ya do on these threads, Kappos never quoted you.

    Hmmmm!

    What ya really should have been sayin is that some of the Chuckles come on purpose and some come from people who don’t mean to be provided chuckles but still do (like you).

  4. 21

    pingaling: Weza got all kinds of “inanity” over here.

    Yes, we have the amusing kind and we also have ping’s.

  5. 19

    one of his readers decided

    O it was much more than one and it was much more virulent. In fact, it prompted one of the rare Hawk apologies. I think the apology was prompted by his business partner who realized how thin-skinned the Hawk’s business would be if the comment were left standing.

    Your recollection abilities must be tarnished by the woodshed whippings ya got there.

  6. 18

    Good luck with that suggestion, Paulie.

    As it is, all these suggestions will be tied to the topic through the Broadest Unreasonable Interpretation standard under the direction of KSR, which allows the person having the ordinary skill of being able to write blog comments (admittedly a very low level of skill indeed) to use his common sense and creativity (which admittedly is rather high – idots can be genius ya know).

    Well, whatta ya know? Even politics and the great militray-economic machine can get looped in.

  7. 17

    May I suggest, with the utmost respect, that comments on this blog should all bear some relationship, however passing or superficial, to the originally posted topic.

  8. 16

    “Didn’t the hawk get into a deep pile when he made fun of the church awhile back too?”

    If by a deep pile you mean one of his readers decided to not read and gave him a piece of his thin-skinned mind, then yes. Other than that, no, tard.

  9. 15

    6,

    Didn’t the hawk get into a deep pile when he made fun of the church awhile back too?

    Two O the Best parts I remember:

    Hawk being slammed by one of the writers and tried to “take teh high road” – FAIL.

    A damm funny series about a egg guy and his granpa takin you to the woodshed somethin fierce.

    Oh, and one other thing – a tiff between him and the Eskimo where the sites stopped postin links to each other.

  10. 14

    Although, that said, I do feel like he should bother himself to take the patent bar. It takes like a weekend of studying. Seriously, you make it your profession and use the skills all the time but you can’t be bothered?

  11. 13

    “That said, I for one was not sent, nor did I see any warnings that the Patent Hawk indicates with his comment of “My cautions against ad hominem attacks were observed in the breach.””

    He said some stuff like a long time ago. Probably before you got on the boards. I think he also warned people about getting all up ins his (probably illegal) bizness. So I didn’t say anything about that. Plus, I think people like him should be allowed to help people on apps, I’m against the whole unauthorized practicin’ on lawl lawls, especially if they go so far as to ban people from helping on apps. Me and legendary civil trial lawyer what’s his name.

    “However, prior to the complete shutdown of comments there were two particular comments first removed that in my mind were not ad hominem attacks and were rather sharp barbs with ethical undertones directed quite directly at the Patent Hawk business. I had commented as such myself – and while other comment strings remain (including many of the Tard variety), it is most peculiar that only one comment string was erased in its entirety (which included my note on the disappearing comments, which I assure you, while pointed, was well above board on the ethical ship.”

    Yeah I know, I think that’s what happened. Pity too. Wasn’t it Babel Boy bringing his same comments as he posted periodically?

    “I deleted the bookmark to his site today. He was always on the fringe with regard to usefulness … his latest actions put it over the edge.”

    Baleting comments makes him less useful? Less amusing surely, but I don’t know about useful. I guess somewhat less useful since you can’t comment and get other people’s opinions.

    Maybe if we could just get babel boy (wasn’t it him? I don’t remember) to stfu hawk would back off?

  12. 12

    Come on in and join the party. Hitch your horse and unload the chuckle wagon.

    Weza got all kinds of “inanity” over here.

  13. 11

    I liked the Hawk’s domain.

    Enough irreverence as compared to the Stuffy IPWatchdog, and not so overrun with pure inanity as this place.

    If I were to comment on every pedantic comment here, it would be a full time job. Foolish posting is quite the norm here. I suppose I might find some release here, but inane and off-topic excursions are so often taken here that my verbal talents would simply go unrecognized in this swamp.

    Can anyone recommend a nice irreverent mid-size blog?

  14. 10

    If ad hominem attacks should be precluded in this blog, then I hope that ad hominem expressions of approval are not. Anyone who knows Teresa and is aware of her work e.g. at AIPLA is bound to have confidence that she will make a major contribution in her new post.

    There are, however, broader issues. At the head of the USPTO we have two experienced and very capable patent attorneys, one from industry and one from private practice. It is not reasonable to expect that even such capable individuals will transform the behaviour of the USPTO in a day. However, there have been many positive developments as noted in this blog, and we can be confident that Teresa will help these developments continue.

    As regards Sharon Barner’s visits to China, nobody undertakes business trips for no reason. Given the growing size and economic importance of China and the size of the Chinese industral base, it is no surprise that she should have visited the Chinese patent office. The importance of maintaining close cooperation should be self-evident.

  15. 9

    I recall the comment in question. I was quite amused because it certainly put him in his place.

    I have never been a fan of the Hawk’s tone. Far too condescending for my taste. If he had stuck to comments on the law, I would have been OK, but too often he strayed into calling into the question the competence of the people involved … which ultimately became a pitch for what he was doing.

    I deleted the bookmark to his site today. He was always on the fringe with regard to usefulness … his latest actions put it over the edge.

  16. 8

    Can there be little doubt 6?

    If you cannot understand that calling someone a “tard” has no correlation with someone’s behavior rather is a direct attack on character, then you need not only charm school, but logic school as well.

    I’m just pulling your leg 6.

    That said, I for one was not sent, nor did I see any warnings that the Patent Hawk indicates with his comment of “My cautions against ad hominem attacks were observed in the breach.” And I fully admit to such attacks as I deemed necessary on those foolish enough to post foolishly.

    However, prior to the complete shutdown of comments there were two particular comments first removed that in my mind were not ad hominem attacks and were rather sharp barbs with ethical undertones directed quite directly at the Patent Hawk business. I had commented as such myself – and while other comment strings remain (including many of the Tard variety), it is most peculiar that only one comment string was erased in its entirety (which included my note on the disappearing comments, which I assure you, while pointed, was well above board on the ethical ship.

    Let it be known that a downed hawk sinks fast.

  17. 7

    “http://www.patenthawk.com/blog/2011/02/groucho_clubbed.html”

    And here I thought it was because someone kept on, and kept on, and kept on saying that hawk was practicing on the lawl illegally just before the comments section went down that made him shut down on the comments.

    I admit though, maybe it was me calling what’s his tard a tard. I rather hope it wasn’t :(. And I’d like to think that was a “grounded attacks on behavior” rather than a “ungrounded attacks on character”. I guess we’ll never know.

  18. 5

    What a good point from Paul Cole. The requirements that, on the one hand, chem/bio and, on the other hand, EE have of a properly functioning patent system, become ever more starkly opposed. This duo can help law-givers and opinion-leaders correctly to distinguish what’s of fundamental importance from that which is less important than that.

  19. 4

    An excellent choice! There will now be a chemical/biotech point of view as well as an elctronics/software point of view in the senior management of the USPTO. Best wishes to Teresa in her new appointment.

  20. 3

    Here is a similar story

    Live from New York it’s the 5th Annual PLI Patent Law Institute. Okay, it doesn’t roll off the tongue quite the same way, but over the next two days we will explore all aspects of the practice of patent law, from litigation, to transactional practice to patent prosecution.

    Starting off day one is the newly minted private citizen Sharon Barner, who most recently was the Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Barner was introduced by John White (of PLI patent bar review fame), who pointed out that during her tenure she continued to commute weekends back to Chicago from Alexandria, VA so as to not uproot her family. Over her tenure, which was about 16 months, Barner also managed to fit in no less than 8 trips to China on official government business, among the 17 foreign missions she participated in. Let’s just say she really racked up some frequent flyer miles!

  21. 1

    Hellllllooooooooooooooo deputy director!

    “that Michelle Lee (Google’s IP Chief) and Shanna Winters (Congressional Counsel) were also under consideration for the post. ”

    Seriously? No mans at all?

Comments are closed.