Whether it be for cybersecurity advice; data breach response advice; or SEC/FINRA fraud or compliance, John Reed Stark can become a qualified expert. John Reed Stark’s lengthy and distinguished career provides a unique kind of expert, whose reputation as an independent, objective and experienced professional puts him at the top of expert witness lists. John Reed Stark's experience includes:
- Almost 20 years with the SEC (This includes 11 years as Founder and Chief of the SEC’s Office of Internet Enforcement and 15 years leading cyber-related projects, investigations and broad range of substantial and pioneering SEC enforcement actions);
- 15 years teaching a law and technology course as Adjunct Professor of Law at Georgetown University Law School (1995 - 2010) and since 2017 as Senior Lecturing Fellow at Duke University Law School;
- Authoring or co-authoring more than 100 articles published concerning technology and the law; and
- Over five years leading cyber-related and digital compliance engagements at a leading international data breach response/digital risk management firm, including three years in charge of the firm's Washington, D.C. office.
For instance, John Reed Stark has actually served as an expert in opposition to and on behalf of the SEC on several occasions and has also served as an expert for a broad range of private and public companies -- and also on behalf of the Canadian Department of Justice. John Reed Stark’s curriculum vitae details an extensive and illustrious career of relevant cyber and SEC experience and is available upon request.
Learn More about John Reed Stark's qualifications:
John Reed Stark | Biography
Opinion of the SEC In the Matter of Anthony Fields | February 20, 2015
Initial Decision In the Matter of Anthony Fields | December 5, 2012
SEC administrative proceeding and follow-on respondent appeal in which John Reed Stark is admitted as an expert, and his testimony is accepted and relied upon by the SEC Administrative Law Judge in her decision, as well as by the Commission in denying the respondent's appeal.