Sean Patrick Suiter

Attorney in Omaha, NE
Delta Sigma Rho; Tau Kappa Alpha. Judicial Clerk, Hon. John T. Grant, Nebraska Supreme Court, 1988-1989. Author: 67 Patent World 16; 4 Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents 1319. Adjunct Professor of Law, Creighton University School of Law. Expert Witness: Patent Office Practice and Procedure, Infringement, and Related Issues. Adjunct Professor of Patent Law, University of Peking, School of Intellectual Property.
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 5.0 of 5

Areas of Law

Intellectual Property Law
Intellectual Property Law


Peer Rating


Overall Peer Rating

5.0 out of 5.0
  • Meets very high criteria of general ethical standards
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.

Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1988, Nebraska and U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska
1990, U.S. Court of Appeals, for the Federal and Eighth Circuits
1991, U.S. Court of International Trade and U.S. Supreme Court
registered to practice before U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Additional Payment Information
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Fixed Fees Available
  • Law School Attended

    Creighton University

    University Attended

    Creighton University
    English Literature

    University of Nebraska
    Chemistry and Physics

    Birth Information

    Born in 1958
    McCook, Nebraska, March 31, 1958

    Associations & Memberships

    Nebraska State Bar Association.

    Contact Information


    402-496-0300 Call Now




    Send email to Sean Patrick Suiter

    Office Information
    Sean Patrick Suiter
     14301 FNB Parkway, Suite 220,
    Omaha, NE 68154-5299

    Maintains an office in multiple locations

    Suiter Swantz pc llo (Omaha, Nebraska)

    About Client Rating
    About Peer Rating

    Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

    Determining a Rating

    The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

    • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
    • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
    • 1-2.9 Rated

    Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

    The Reviewers

    Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.


    Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

    Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

    Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

    Martindale-Hubbell's role

    Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

    It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.