BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

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

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:32 am

Hey guys,
So I narrowed down my choices to Boston College, George Washington and Emory. My other option is UCD with $$ but I don't like sac and their employment stats are under par. Currently WL at Boston University and Texas. I have done some extensive researches, but still cant make a decision. Any advice/suggestions on this thread would be much appreciated.

Stats: 2.95UGPA, 2.73LSAC GPA/167 took LSAT 3 times. i'm not interested in retaking.

COA: BC=GW>Emory, after factoring in tuition, scholarship and living cost. My parents will pay all the expenses regardless of where I go to school. I also have a lot of personal savings so $$ is not a issue here.

I graduated from UC Berkeley, majored in EECS and Materials Science. I'm 90% set on patent law, either lit or pro. I want big law post grad and I'm open to move in house down the road. I don’t have a geographic preference. I'm from Palo Alto. CA would be ideal, but not a must.

At this point, job perspective and the ability to succeed in law school place the most weight in my decision. GW has the most robust IP program. GW places 30-35% of its classes into BL and I heard a lot of them are IP ppl with STEM background. Major problem with GW is its class size (550-600), and I’m concerned about the competition in school/DC legal market. Previous TLS posts say its career service is shitty and OCI is always a bloodbath... BC consistently has the most BL placement (35-40%). My major concern about BC is I feel tech industry in Boston is more life science/pharma oriented and most firms’ IP groups are filled with ppl with bio/chem background, so there won’t be as much jobs available for EE with background in silicon valley type of tech. Emory Law has tons of money so students may get better support. It has a good reputation in the South but its employment number (22-28% BL) is not on par with its peer schools. Not many firms even show up on their OCI. Some of its patent bar eligible grads placed well in ATL and NY, but i don’t know the overall sample size. ATL seems like a good place to live though.

I'm planning to visit all three schools in the upcoming weeks. Meanwhile, any insights are much appreciated!

User avatar
floatie

Silver
Posts: 599
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 3:39 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby floatie » Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:21 pm

I go to Emory and I'm in their IP program (TI:GER). PM me if you have specific questions. Being in TI:GER has been a phenomenal way to make connections in the ATL IP community, and all of us who wanted biglaw or an IP boutique (whether in ATL or elsewhere) got it.

One thing I'll say is that Emory's BL numbers are lower because more students at Emory compared to other schools are interested in PI. A large proportion of the 1L/2L class wants to go into prosecution/defense or other public interest work, and a full 25-30% of the 1Ls last year didn't even do OCI. Of my peers who wanted biglaw/midlaw or an IP boutique, none of us struggled to get those kinds of jobs. Being patent bar eligible will also boost your employment chances in and out of ATL, and Emory has separate OCIs in NY/DC/Chicago/SF, where a lot of the firms who don't come to ATL will recruit Emory students.

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:48 pm

Thanks for the info! I received your PM message though, but TLS requires me to "participate more" before I can reply... Do you mind PM me your email so I can email you my questions? I will be at Emory's admitted student day this weekend.


floatie wrote:I go to Emory and I'm in their IP program (TI:GER). PM me if you have specific questions. Being in TI:GER has been a phenomenal way to make connections in the ATL IP community, and all of us who wanted biglaw or an IP boutique (whether in ATL or elsewhere) got it.

One thing I'll say is that Emory's BL numbers are lower because more students at Emory compared to other schools are interested in PI. A large proportion of the 1L/2L class wants to go into prosecution/defense or other public interest work, and a full 25-30% of the 1Ls last year didn't even do OCI. Of my peers who wanted biglaw/midlaw or an IP boutique, none of us struggled to get those kinds of jobs. Being patent bar eligible will also boost your employment chances in and out of ATL, and Emory has separate OCIs in NY/DC/Chicago/SF, where a lot of the firms who don't come to ATL will recruit Emory students.

miskellyjohnson

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:10 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby miskellyjohnson » Mon Mar 25, 2019 10:48 am

Just a few comments.

You probably wont have a hard time finding a job with an EE degree from Berkeley, if you are decently flexible and do modestly well in Law School. The uGPA will rule out some firms, but I would think EE from Berkeley would be enough to get you decent options.

1) About GW's IP numbers: GW has a part time program. Patent agents love part time programs because it allows them to work in the day while studying at night, and often their current firm pays for their law school. When they graduate, they become patent attorneys at the same firm they were already working. So when you look at GW's IP-specific stats, keep in mind that a decent amount of those people already had jobs in IP. They were not applying 'cold' like you are. (This is why other part-time programs like Santa Clara and Suffolk have inflated numbers in the IP space-- while GW is obviously better than those schools, its just something to keep in mind).

2) While Boston certainly is experiencing phenomenal growth in the life science sector, it is also home to MIT, which is probably the #2 school in the country for (non-life science) tech startups after Stanford. Not to mention Harvard, BC, and BU which all offer CS and engineering. There are a lot of tech companies in Boston, and a lot of venture capital money as well. You will not have a problem finding work for EE in Boston. I would guess out of Atlanta / DC/ Boston, Boston gives you the best chance to go in house somewhere. There are also a lot of law firms in Boston, especially of the old, well established and respected variety. You will have opportunities there.

3) Atlanta's tech scene is growing (alongside Georgia Tech). This might give you the opportunity to get in early, make connections, etc. But there aren't that many big law firms in Atlanta, or the ones that open there are often smaller branches. Without looking at any numbers and completely going out on a limb, I would guess that Boston and DC have a lot more big law opportunities than Atlanta, and more well-funded unicorn startups as well. Also, as dumb as it is to say, I don't see the Berkeley degree being quite as valued in Atlanta (it would probably come after Duke, GT, etc., but obviously should still be good enough to get you opportunities).

Have you tried pursuing a patent agent position first? Highly recommend you consider it before law school. Tons of advantages to it -- see if you like the field, make money, learn about the business, maybe get your firm to pay for school. Then you can make a much better informed decision after a year or two as an agent.

Just some things to consider. I have no idea which one plays the best in California. Also, coming from Cali, do you think you can support Boston weather? Or even DC weather? Or not driving? I would think Atlanta lifestyle would match up best.

QContinuum

Moderator
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby QContinuum » Mon Mar 25, 2019 12:17 pm

miskellyjohnson wrote:You probably wont have a hard time finding a job with an EE degree from Berkeley, if you are decently flexible and do modestly well in Law School. The uGPA will rule out some firms, but I would think EE from Berkeley would be enough to get you decent options.

miskelly's post above is excellent and I agree with all of it, with two minor caveats. First, very few law firms ever ask law student applicants about their uGPA. I would simply leave it off the resume and not bring it up unless specifically asked.

miskellyjohnson wrote:Have you tried pursuing a patent agent position first? Highly recommend you consider it before law school. Tons of advantages to it -- see if you like the field, make money, learn about the business, maybe get your firm to pay for school. Then you can make a much better informed decision after a year or two as an agent.

This is my general advice as well, but OP may find it challenging applying to patent agent positions because of their low GPA. (uGPA would actually be relevant in this context, as OP wouldn't be applying as a law student.)

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:57 pm

Thanks for the input. Yes, I fully understand how important grades, esp 1L grades place in my future, and I will bust my ass for it regardless of my decision. I want to get some experience on patent pro, just to get a sense of the work. If I decide to go in house, I'd prob still do all pro/lit/trans, but place more weight on the later two. I will see my chance down the road, but BL post grad is the first step. I'm studying for the patent bar at the moment, and hopefully I can get it done before school starts. I'm fine with the weather and not driving - spent 1yr in London and everything about London is similar to Boston/DC.

I really appreciate your input on GW about their IP numbers. I was told by some patent attorneys in SV about the same thing - ie. the PTO examiners PT at GW, and it's a good chance to network, etc but no one brought up the number. I will try check with the admission/career service on the un-inflated numbers. imo 50-100 (?) patent bar eligible students per class still sounds very scary. If I go there, I would prob still gun hard for NY just b/c the competition in DC.

I'm in Boston rn and I personally liked both BU and BC a lot. The communities are really supportive. Profs and alumnis from both schools told me I would be fine w/EE. Only problem is I was in at BC, not BU, whose patent program is more robust. And I personally prefer more city feeling.

I dont know much about Emory's IP program and I dont know anyone who knows about it... I agree with the BL opportunities in ATL is limited, and if I go Emory, I would probably still need to gun hard for NY. I agree a degree from Berkeley may not be valued in the South, just like very few in CA actually know about Emory. - A lot about their program need to be clarified there...



miskellyjohnson wrote:Just a few comments.

You probably wont have a hard time finding a job with an EE degree from Berkeley, if you are decently flexible and do modestly well in Law School. The uGPA will rule out some firms, but I would think EE from Berkeley would be enough to get you decent options.

1) About GW's IP numbers: GW has a part time program. Patent agents love part time programs because it allows them to work in the day while studying at night, and often their current firm pays for their law school. When they graduate, they become patent attorneys at the same firm they were already working. So when you look at GW's IP-specific stats, keep in mind that a decent amount of those people already had jobs in IP. They were not applying 'cold' like you are. (This is why other part-time programs like Santa Clara and Suffolk have inflated numbers in the IP space-- while GW is obviously better than those schools, its just something to keep in mind).

2) While Boston certainly is experiencing phenomenal growth in the life science sector, it is also home to MIT, which is probably the #2 school in the country for (non-life science) tech startups after Stanford. Not to mention Harvard, BC, and BU which all offer CS and engineering. There are a lot of tech companies in Boston, and a lot of venture capital money as well. You will not have a problem finding work for EE in Boston. I would guess out of Atlanta / DC/ Boston, Boston gives you the best chance to go in house somewhere. There are also a lot of law firms in Boston, especially of the old, well established and respected variety. You will have opportunities there.

3) Atlanta's tech scene is growing (alongside Georgia Tech). This might give you the opportunity to get in early, make connections, etc. But there aren't that many big law firms in Atlanta, or the ones that open there are often smaller branches. Without looking at any numbers and completely going out on a limb, I would guess that Boston and DC have a lot more big law opportunities than Atlanta, and more well-funded unicorn startups as well. Also, as dumb as it is to say, I don't see the Berkeley degree being quite as valued in Atlanta (it would probably come after Duke, GT, etc., but obviously should still be good enough to get you opportunities).

Have you tried pursuing a patent agent position first? Highly recommend you consider it before law school. Tons of advantages to it -- see if you like the field, make money, learn about the business, maybe get your firm to pay for school. Then you can make a much better informed decision after a year or two as an agent.

Just some things to consider. I have no idea which one plays the best in California. Also, coming from Cali, do you think you can support Boston weather? Or even DC weather? Or not driving? I would think Atlanta lifestyle would match up best.

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Mon Mar 25, 2019 3:05 pm

Thanks for the input. I already have my GPA removed from my resume. Learned that in a hard way.
I know tech background is not required for litigation jobs, is having that background going to give me some advantages in lit job hunting?
Also, I'm interested in working as a law clerk/tech agent in law firm during my 2L/3L year. Is one school/location going to be better than the others for that purpose? I want to get some experience in Pro, but I'm not planning my career around it.

QContinuum wrote:
miskellyjohnson wrote:You probably wont have a hard time finding a job with an EE degree from Berkeley, if you are decently flexible and do modestly well in Law School. The uGPA will rule out some firms, but I would think EE from Berkeley would be enough to get you decent options.

miskelly's post above is excellent and I agree with all of it, with two minor caveats. First, very few law firms ever ask law student applicants about their uGPA. I would simply leave it off the resume and not bring it up unless specifically asked.

miskellyjohnson wrote:Have you tried pursuing a patent agent position first? Highly recommend you consider it before law school. Tons of advantages to it -- see if you like the field, make money, learn about the business, maybe get your firm to pay for school. Then you can make a much better informed decision after a year or two as an agent.

This is my general advice as well, but OP may find it challenging applying to patent agent positions because of their low GPA. (uGPA would actually be relevant in this context, as OP wouldn't be applying as a law student.)

QContinuum

Moderator
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby QContinuum » Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:21 pm

NoseTackle wrote:Thanks for the input. I already have my GPA removed from my resume. Learned that in a hard way.
I know tech background is not required for litigation jobs, is having that background going to give me some advantages in lit job hunting?

No advantage for general litigation or for any kind of litigation other than patent litigation. Non-patent litigation won't care at all. For patent litigation your background will be a plus, but more in the "qualifies you for IP litigation" kind of way (the field is increasingly expecting/requiring new entrants to be patent bar eligible and have a STEM background) and less in a "wow!" kind of way.

NoseTackle wrote:Also, I'm interested in working as a law clerk/tech agent in law firm during my 2L/3L year. Is one school/location going to be better than the others for that purpose? I want to get some experience in Pro, but I'm not planning my career around it.

Very firm-dependent, and you'd probably want to be in an area with many patent openings to make that possible (i.e., not Atlanta). Boston would probably be best, followed by D.C.

Also, part-time positions are typically limited to patent agents doing prosecution. It's very uncommon to see law students be allowed to work part-time in other areas in BigLaw, IP litigation included.

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:44 pm

Thanks! And given my UGPA, how hard would it be for me to get a summer/term time patent prosecution job?

QContinuum wrote: Also, part-time positions are typically limited to patent agents doing prosecution. It's very uncommon to see law students be allowed to work part-time in other areas in BigLaw, IP litigation included.

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Mon Mar 25, 2019 6:47 pm

To clarify, from either DC or Boston. I have some work and a lot of research experience in EE/software and electrical materials.

NoseTackle wrote:Thanks! And given my UGPA, how hard would it be for me to get a summer/term time patent prosecution job?

QContinuum wrote: Also, part-time positions are typically limited to patent agents doing prosecution. It's very uncommon to see law students be allowed to work part-time in other areas in BigLaw, IP litigation included.

miskellyjohnson

New
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Dec 25, 2018 2:10 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby miskellyjohnson » Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:47 am

NoseTackle wrote:To clarify, from either DC or Boston. I have some work and a lot of research experience in EE/software and electrical materials.

NoseTackle wrote:Thanks! And given my UGPA, how hard would it be for me to get a summer/term time patent prosecution job?

QContinuum wrote: Also, part-time positions are typically limited to patent agents doing prosecution. It's very uncommon to see law students be allowed to work part-time in other areas in BigLaw, IP litigation included.


I assume a 2L SA prosecution job, given "a lot of experience in EE/software" and your degree would not be difficult to get. A 1L SA is within the realm of possibility. I dont know of firms that specifically hire for during the semesters-- you might have to try to work something out with the firm where you do the 1L/2L.

But if you want to work through law school, the best thing is for you to get hired now and delay law school by a year. (Your uGPA may hurt you here, but shouldnt stop you from trying given your background).

If you are interested in litigation, Pepper Hamilton is hiring a technical specialist for litigation right now with a background in semiconductor fabrication (which i assume you can twist your "electrical materials" research to cover). https://g.co/kgs/yTjGuL . There is probably no better way to start a career in patent litigation. (Litigation tech spec positions are somewhat rare, but if you routinely search you will find no shortage of prosecution tech spec positions looking for your background). A tech spec often does more interesting work than the junior associates on a litigation, since a tech spec is not tasked with boring legal formalities of numbering documents and preparing formal briefs but is usually involved with the wider "strategy" type discussions (claim construction, validity analysis, etc).

WilmerHale is hiring (and is probably always hiring) tech spec with an EE/software background, probably for prosecution. https://g.co/kgs/TqeM5u . As are, from a quick 2inute search, Finnegan, Choate, Vanguar, and Polsinelli ...

If you dont want to do night school, some firms will allow you to do day school at BC. You'd have to check with the firm.

NoseTackle

New
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby NoseTackle » Tue Mar 26, 2019 10:36 am

Thanks!!! The Materials Science part of my degree was specifically for semiconductors, ie micro-fabrication and semiconductor processing. Maybe I should start job searching. Any idea on if DC has some demand in devices/Semiconductor processing or EE in general? I did a quick search on DC's semiconductor/device industry and didn't see much...

miskellyjohnson wrote:
If you are interested in litigation, Pepper Hamilton is hiring a technical specialist for litigation right now with a background in semiconductor fabrication (which i assume you can twist your "electrical materials" research to cover). https://g.co/kgs/yTjGuL . There is probably no better way to start a career in patent litigation. (Litigation tech spec positions are somewhat rare, but if you routinely search you will find no shortage of prosecution tech spec positions looking for your background). A tech spec often does more interesting work than the junior associates on a litigation, since a tech spec is not tasked with boring legal formalities of numbering documents and preparing formal briefs but is usually involved with the wider "strategy" type discussions (claim construction, validity analysis, etc).

If you dont want to do night school, some firms will allow you to do day school at BC. You'd have to check with the firm.

Qtc

New
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:35 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby Qtc » Tue Mar 26, 2019 8:58 pm

There is virtually no difference between any of these schools. You should go to the one located where you want to practice. None have national reputations.

Law2019

New
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 5:30 pm

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby Law2019 » Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:51 pm

NoseTackle wrote:Hey guys,
So I narrowed down my choices to Boston College, George Washington and Emory. My other option is UCD with $$ but I don't like sac and their employment stats are under par. Currently WL at Boston University and Texas. I have done some extensive researches, but still cant make a decision. Any advice/suggestions on this thread would be much appreciated.

Stats: 2.95UGPA, 2.73LSAC GPA/167 took LSAT 3 times. i'm not interested in retaking.

COA: BC=GW>Emory, after factoring in tuition, scholarship and living cost. My parents will pay all the expenses regardless of where I go to school. I also have a lot of personal savings so $$ is not a issue here.

I graduated from UC Berkeley, majored in EECS and Materials Science. I'm 90% set on patent law, either lit or pro. I want big law post grad and I'm open to move in house down the road. I don’t have a geographic preference. I'm from Palo Alto. CA would be ideal, but not a must.

At this point, job perspective and the ability to succeed in law school place the most weight in my decision. GW has the most robust IP program. GW places 30-35% of its classes into BL and I heard a lot of them are IP ppl with STEM background. Major problem with GW is its class size (550-600), and I’m concerned about the competition in school/DC legal market. Previous TLS posts say its career service is shitty and OCI is always a bloodbath... BC consistently has the most BL placement (35-40%). My major concern about BC is I feel tech industry in Boston is more life science/pharma oriented and most firms’ IP groups are filled with ppl with bio/chem background, so there won’t be as much jobs available for EE with background in silicon valley type of tech. Emory Law has tons of money so students may get better support. It has a good reputation in the South but its employment number (22-28% BL) is not on par with its peer schools. Not many firms even show up on their OCI. Some of its patent bar eligible grads placed well in ATL and NY, but i don’t know the overall sample size. ATL seems like a good place to live though.

I'm planning to visit all three schools in the upcoming weeks. Meanwhile, any insights are much appreciated!


Since you do not have a geographic preference, pick the school with the lowest COA. Those schools have more or less the same job outcomes.

LaChusa2020

New
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:36 am

Re: BC $$ vs GW $$ vs Emory $$$ for IP

Postby LaChusa2020 » Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:49 am

Qtc wrote:There is virtually no difference between any of these schools. You should go to the one located where you want to practice. None have national reputations.


This. I'd decide on COA and where you want to practice. Ignore specialty rankings. If you want to practice in CA or NY...knowing both markets, I would not think any of those schools provide a substantial advantage over the other. If you Boston, GW or Atlanta the choice is easy.



Return to “Choosing a Law School?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests