UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

How much $$ before GW is worth it

Sticker Price
8
20%
5k/year
1
3%
10k/year
1
3%
15k/year
6
15%
20k/year
24
60%
 
Total votes: 40

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Tue Jul 24, 2012 8:23 pm

PolySuyGuy wrote:
Nammertat wrote:Currently in @ UC Davis with substantial $$. (~$40k/year with scholly & need)

Engineering background, and looking to go into Patent Litigation / IP

At what point does it make sense to go to GW? (Poll @ Top)



You are my TLS hero. The way you have conquered the waitlists this year.


Do you have any other waitlist schools?


:D LOL yes actually... I've worked my way off of W&M/UMN/Davis also, and am still in contention @ Penn/UVA.

Waitlists are the life of reverse splitters especially. Schools get down to the wire and have to find a way to either bump their LSAT or GPA #'s to spoof next year's rankings... I suppose I'll play that role if need be!

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby stratocophic » Tue Jul 24, 2012 8:24 pm

fatduck wrote:
Nammertat wrote:
clintone88 wrote:I think one other important distinction is if you're EE/CS or not. Those are the two credentials that will help you a lot in SF/SV, the obvious market for Davis. If you are, then I would do Davis over GW unless they have close to the same cost of attendance (within like $15k). Otherwise, if you're ME or similar, I would seriously reconsider law school, and if you're life science with bio, then I think GW is better because of the higher life science market on the east coast.


My degrees are not in science, and thus will not be eligible to sit for the patent bar (and thus no patent prosecution). The good news is that I had no intention of going the prosecution route, and instead want to focus on litigation.

I DO however have several years of work experience in engineering, which should translate rather nicely.

you probably should have mentioned this earlier. i'm pretty sure everyone will now say to take all the money you can get.
That's not "good news," that means youre going to have to be like top 10% at either place to even have a shot. Go to Davis if you must, but with the understanding that there's a strong chance you'll never sniff patent lit.

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Tue Jul 24, 2012 8:34 pm

stratocophic wrote:
fatduck wrote:
Nammertat wrote:
clintone88 wrote:I think one other important distinction is if you're EE/CS or not. Those are the two credentials that will help you a lot in SF/SV, the obvious market for Davis. If you are, then I would do Davis over GW unless they have close to the same cost of attendance (within like $15k). Otherwise, if you're ME or similar, I would seriously reconsider law school, and if you're life science with bio, then I think GW is better because of the higher life science market on the east coast.


My degrees are not in science, and thus will not be eligible to sit for the patent bar (and thus no patent prosecution). The good news is that I had no intention of going the prosecution route, and instead want to focus on litigation.

I DO however have several years of work experience in engineering, which should translate rather nicely.

you probably should have mentioned this earlier. i'm pretty sure everyone will now say to take all the money you can get.
That's not "good news," that means youre going to have to be like top 10% at either place to even have a shot. Go to Davis if you must, but with the understanding that there's a strong chance you'll never sniff patent lit.


I think there is a lot of merit to what you're saying. The patent route is definitely going to be tougher to obtain, and could ultimately be out of reach. A lot of it is going to depend on finding a decent 1L summer associate position, and working the ladder from there. I am prepared to explore other areas if need be, or if my grades make patent lit a remote possibility.

PolySuyGuy
Posts: 441
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2012 11:59 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby PolySuyGuy » Tue Jul 31, 2012 12:56 pm

I assume you embraced GW?

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:05 pm

PolySuyGuy wrote:I assume you embraced GW?


Sigh.... yeah.... they ended up coming in right around my break point. In the end, they were my #1 choice and I couldn't turn it down!

User avatar
Mr. Frodo
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:59 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Mr. Frodo » Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:11 pm

Waitlists are the life of reverse splitters especially. Schools get down to the wire and have to find a way to either bump their LSAT or GPA #'s to spoof next year's rankings... I suppose I'll play that role if need be!


So people with greater than 75% GPAs at all T-14 schools are more likely to get off waitlists than others?

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:19 pm

Mr. Frodo wrote:
Waitlists are the life of reverse splitters especially. Schools get down to the wire and have to find a way to either bump their LSAT or GPA #'s to spoof next year's rankings... I suppose I'll play that role if need be!


So people with greater than 75% GPAs at all T-14 schools are more likely to get off waitlists than others?


I don't know that I'd say it quite like this. When wait list spots come up, schools have to look at their entering class statistics for GPA & LSAT, and figure out what they need to boost to keep their rankings going. In this particular case, GW was light on GPA and thus the stats of the last few people pulled in.

On the other side of the equation is Penn, who appears to have gone after GPAs in the beginning of the cycle and since then has only pulled standard splitters.

User avatar
Mr. Frodo
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:59 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Mr. Frodo » Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:28 pm

Nammertat wrote:
Mr. Frodo wrote:
Waitlists are the life of reverse splitters especially. Schools get down to the wire and have to find a way to either bump their LSAT or GPA #'s to spoof next year's rankings... I suppose I'll play that role if need be!


So people with greater than 75% GPAs at all T-14 schools are more likely to get off waitlists than others?


I don't know that I'd say it quite like this. When wait list spots come up, schools have to look at their entering class statistics for GPA & LSAT, and figure out what they need to boost to keep their rankings going. In this particular case, GW was light on GPA and thus the stats of the last few people pulled in.

On the other side of the equation is Penn, who appears to have gone after GPAs in the beginning of the cycle and since then has only pulled standard splitters.


Good to know. Thanks. :lol:

ambiTTTTion
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:58 am

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby ambiTTTTion » Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:20 pm

Nammertat wrote:I think there is a lot of merit to what you're saying. The patent route is definitely going to be tougher to obtain, and could ultimately be out of reach. A lot of it is going to depend on finding a decent 1L summer associate position, and working the ladder from there. I am prepared to explore other areas if need be, or if my grades make patent lit a remote possibility.


I hate to be a debbie-downer, but your grades will not make patent lit a remote possibility, your lack of technical degree will. There seems to be this thought that since a science degree is only REQUIRED for prosecution, firms don't require one for litigation. This is almost 100% false. Shooting for IP anything without a technical degree is almost certainly a losing proposition.

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby stratocophic » Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:58 pm

ambiTTTTion wrote:
Nammertat wrote:I think there is a lot of merit to what you're saying. The patent route is definitely going to be tougher to obtain, and could ultimately be out of reach. A lot of it is going to depend on finding a decent 1L summer associate position, and working the ladder from there. I am prepared to explore other areas if need be, or if my grades make patent lit a remote possibility.


I hate to be a debbie-downer, but your grades will not make patent lit a remote possibility, your lack of technical degree will. There seems to be this thought that since a science degree is only REQUIRED for prosecution, firms don't require one for litigation. This is almost 100% false. Shooting for IP anything without a technical degree is almost certainly a losing proposition.
I don't disagree, we've just got our hands on two different parts of the elephant. He won't get big law to even have a shot at trying to rotate through a firm's IP group without either a) the degree or b) good grades. "a" is already out. The lack of a tech degree is very likely a limiting factor but could be overcome by summering with a willing firm; going to either of these schools without a tech degree is definitely a limiting factor and means he'll need (minus a freak exception like connections or insane luck) to be top 5-15% to get to even the slim hope of being able to summer at a firm that a) has an IP lit practice and b) lets him rotate through that practice in order to make a bid for a permanent spot in it. In the end his (already slim, due to the lack of a tech degree) odds of finding a firm that meets both pf those reqs depend on the school/grades, but yeah either way it basically ain't happening with these two combos. Odds may be slightly better if female, due to tendency for IP groups to skew male.

ambiTTTTion
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:58 am

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby ambiTTTTion » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:19 pm

stratocophic wrote:
ambiTTTTion wrote:
Nammertat wrote:I think there is a lot of merit to what you're saying. The patent route is definitely going to be tougher to obtain, and could ultimately be out of reach. A lot of it is going to depend on finding a decent 1L summer associate position, and working the ladder from there. I am prepared to explore other areas if need be, or if my grades make patent lit a remote possibility.


I hate to be a debbie-downer, but your grades will not make patent lit a remote possibility, your lack of technical degree will. There seems to be this thought that since a science degree is only REQUIRED for prosecution, firms don't require one for litigation. This is almost 100% false. Shooting for IP anything without a technical degree is almost certainly a losing proposition.
I don't disagree, we've just got our hands on two different parts of the elephant. He won't get big law to even have a shot at trying to rotate through a firm's IP group without either a) the degree or b) good grades. "a" is already out. The lack of a tech degree is very likely a limiting factor but could be overcome by summering with a willing firm; going to either of these schools without a tech degree is definitely a limiting factor and means he'll need (minus a freak exception like connections or insane luck) to be top 5-15% to get to even the slim hope of being able to summer at a firm that a) has an IP lit practice and b) lets him rotate through that practice in order to make a bid for a permanent spot in it. In the end his (already slim, due to the lack of a tech degree) odds of finding a firm that meets both pf those reqs depend on the school/grades, but yeah either way it basically ain't happening with these two combos. Odds may be slightly better if female, due to tendency for IP groups to skew male.


I mostly agree. The problem is I don't think the requirements for big law IP are the degree OR good grades, the degree is the door opener and good grades get you the rest of the way. That being said, top 5% at GW + incredible luck finding a firm who will even look at a non-tech resume and maybe you get a sniff. The WE certainly helps if OP can articulate some sort of tech knowledge because of it on his resume. Not saying it can't happen, but if it does go stock up on lotto tickets.

User avatar
sky7
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:44 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby sky7 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:38 pm

So I get that you don't have a technical degree. That sucks.

My advice - own the GW IP Moot Court competition. FaceTime with Judge Rader, exposure to the subject matter, and a great experience. I've never seen finalists in that comp without big law lit jobs lined up.

sbalive
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby sbalive » Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:07 pm

sky7 wrote:So I get that you don't have a technical degree. That sucks.

My advice - own the GW IP Moot Court competition. FaceTime with Judge Rader, exposure to the subject matter, and a great experience. I've never seen finalists in that comp without big law lit jobs lined up.


So your advice is that OP do something that is less likely than the odds of going to a California T4 for free for 1L, finishing at the top of the class, & then transferring to Berkeley or Stanford? Fantastic. Trust me, there are easier ways to get face time with Judge Rader.

I don't get why it's so hard to understand that GW's reputation in IP was built on a past when (1) most law schools barely taught patent law, or maybe had an adjunct give a seminar in it, so programs like GW and Franklin Pierce were unique, (2) when the usual route to patent law was by an engineering going to law school part-time, often working for the patent office in DC, and (3) most patent law jobs were at boutiques that had strong ties to the established "patent" law schools.

If OP really wants patent lit, there's an easier way. Withdraw, abandon deposit, defer a year, retake LSAT, get T14, do median or better as a 1L, which + WE & if there's demonstrated interest, should get a rotation through patent lit work at a BigLaw firm.

User avatar
queenlizzie13
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 9:30 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby queenlizzie13 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:27 pm

sbalive wrote:
sky7 wrote:So I get that you don't have a technical degree. That sucks.

My advice - own the GW IP Moot Court competition. FaceTime with Judge Rader, exposure to the subject matter, and a great experience. I've never seen finalists in that comp without big law lit jobs lined up.


So your advice is that OP do something that is less likely than the odds of going to a California T4 for free for 1L, finishing at the top of the class, & then transferring to Berkeley or Stanford? Fantastic. Trust me, there are easier ways to get face time with Judge Rader.

I don't get why it's so hard to understand that GW's reputation in IP was built on a past when (1) most law schools barely taught patent law, or maybe had an adjunct give a seminar in it, so programs like GW and Franklin Pierce were unique, (2) when the usual route to patent law was by an engineering going to law school part-time, often working for the patent office in DC, and (3) most patent law jobs were at boutiques that had strong ties to the established "patent" law schools.

If OP really wants patent lit, there's an easier way. Withdraw, abandon deposit, defer a year, retake LSAT, get T14, do median or better as a 1L, which + WE & if there's demonstrated interest, should get a rotation through patent lit work at a BigLaw firm.

GW is stil ranked really high for IP/Patent. It feels like half of the firms coming to our OCI are IP/Patent. The problem is if you don't have a technical degree it will be a lot harder. That said, GW is still top notch for IP/Patent. The only people I know with 1L SA positions were IP. Some people got smaller/boutique firms for 1L summer if they didn't have the grades.

The reputation of the school for IP will get your foot in the door with a lot of firms especially if you take advantage of the patent fairs + GW's regional programs, but regardless you are probably going to have to be around Top 15%-20%+ regardless without a technical degree as most firms will require you to be eligible for the patent bar.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby fatduck » Sat Aug 04, 2012 11:47 am

queenlizzie13 wrote:GW is stil ranked really high for IP/Patent. It feels like half of the firms coming to our OCI are IP/Patent.The problem is if you don't have a technical degree it will be a lot harder. That said, GW is still top notch for IP/Patent. The only people I know with 1L SA positions were IP. Some people got smaller/boutique firms for 1L summer if they didn't have the grades.

The reputation of the school for IP will get your foot in the door with a lot of firms especially if you take advantage of the patent fairs + GW's regional programs, but regardless you are probably going to have to be around Top 15%-20%+ regardless without a technical degree as most firms will require you to be eligible for the patent bar.

none of this has anything to do with GW's "IP ranking" and is true at all similarly ranked law schools

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:37 pm

stratocophic wrote:
fatduck wrote:
Nammertat wrote:
clintone88 wrote:I think one other important distinction is if you're EE/CS or not. Those are the two credentials that will help you a lot in SF/SV, the obvious market for Davis. If you are, then I would do Davis over GW unless they have close to the same cost of attendance (within like $15k). Otherwise, if you're ME or similar, I would seriously reconsider law school, and if you're life science with bio, then I think GW is better because of the higher life science market on the east coast.


My degrees are not in science, and thus will not be eligible to sit for the patent bar (and thus no patent prosecution). The good news is that I had no intention of going the prosecution route, and instead want to focus on litigation.

I DO however have several years of work experience in engineering, which should translate rather nicely.

you probably should have mentioned this earlier. i'm pretty sure everyone will now say to take all the money you can get.
That's not "good news," that means youre going to have to be like top 10% at either place to even have a shot. Go to Davis if you must, but with the understanding that there's a strong chance you'll never sniff patent lit.


So I figured I'd better give a TLS shout out... I ended up in the top 10% at GW and have multiple firms lined up for interviews with their patent litigation groups. Let me just caution people.... 1L.... not easy!

dudders
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 4:56 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby dudders » Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:11 pm

Nammertat wrote:I ended up in the top 10% at GW


GW only tells you IF you're in the top 1-15% or 16-35% brackets.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I kind of doubt 1L scholar designations have been released. I know 1L grades were supposed to come out today but GW doesn't release rankings until ALL 1L grades have been submitted and historically there's no way everyone turns them in on time. Most years at least Turley and LRW are lagging into February.

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:25 pm

dudders wrote:
Nammertat wrote:I ended up in the top 10% at GW


GW only tells you IF you're in the top 1-15% or 16-35% brackets.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I kind of doubt 1L scholar designations have been released. I know 1L grades were supposed to come out today but GW doesn't release rankings until ALL 1L grades have been submitted and historically there's no way everyone turns them in on time. Most years at least Turley and LRW are lagging into February.


Yeah that's all true, but am safely within the bracket and was fortunately not in Turley's class!

dudders
Posts: 468
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 4:56 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby dudders » Fri Jan 25, 2013 11:42 pm

Nammertat wrote:
dudders wrote:
Nammertat wrote:I ended up in the top 10% at GW


GW only tells you IF you're in the top 1-15% or 16-35% brackets.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I kind of doubt 1L scholar designations have been released. I know 1L grades were supposed to come out today but GW doesn't release rankings until ALL 1L grades have been submitted and historically there's no way everyone turns them in on time. Most years at least Turley and LRW are lagging into February.


Yeah that's all true, but am safely within the bracket and was fortunately not in Turley's class!


True, I guess it's pretty easy to know what the top is. It's figuring out where you are in the middle that's difficult. Congrats tho!

BigJT
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:13 am

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby BigJT » Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:02 am

Nammertat wrote:So I figured I'd better give a TLS shout out... I ended up in the top 10% at GW and have multiple firms lined up for interviews with their patent litigation groups. Let me just caution people.... 1L.... not easy!


Well now I feel really silly for choosing Davis with money. I need to remember to check the date on the OP first.

Oh, and congratulations.

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby stratocophic » Sat Jan 26, 2013 4:41 am

Well done on beating the odds. You're not out of the woods yet, so best of luck with interviews and next semester.

For the 0Ls out there, there's a 90% chance you aren't going to end up like OP. The objections ITT stand for all of you.

User avatar
Nammertat
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2012 1:25 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Nammertat » Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:27 am

stratocophic wrote:Well done on beating the odds. You're not out of the woods yet, so best of luck with interviews and next semester.

For the 0Ls out there, there's a 90% chance you aren't going to end up like OP. The objections ITT stand for all of you.


This really is the truth. It is such a crapshoot where you are going to end up that as a 0L you simply can't plan for it.

Jose Reyes
Posts: 27
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Jose Reyes » Wed Jan 30, 2013 2:16 pm

UC Davis!!

User avatar
J-e-L-L-o
Posts: 418
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby J-e-L-L-o » Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:56 pm

Any West Coast firm's?

I would like to know if GW placement in California is like what it used to be in IP.

Thanx

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: UC Davis vs. GW for IP-- $$ involved!

Postby Dr. Dre » Wed Mar 06, 2013 3:23 pm

Jose Reyes wrote:UC Davis!!


no




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: monsterman, NUDad and 14 guests