Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.

Fish v. Finnegan for IP (nationwide)

Fish
13
50%
Finnegan
13
50%
 
Total votes: 26

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:30 pm

Which is better for IP? Let's ignore office locations for now. CB w/ one of them on Tue.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:38 pm

FINNEGAN

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:39 pm

FISH & RICHARDSON

digitalcntrl
Posts: 153
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:36 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby digitalcntrl » Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:48 pm

Finnegan

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:00 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:03 pm

care 2 elaborate re Finnegan? Where've you heard this stuff from.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:09 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:12 pm

NYAssociate wrote:Isn't Finnegan a sinking ship [NO] and didn't F&R no-offer their entire summer associate class in 2009? [NO AGAIN] I mean, since we're doing all these "don't forget LATHAM" threads, might as well mention these black marks [No, because neither fired first-years like Latham did].

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:15 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:17 pm

Hmmmmm. Tough choice. Let's try and visualize it.

Fish & Richardson
--ImageRemoved--
--ImageRemoved--

Finnegan
--ImageRemoved--


I think I'm gonna have to take Fish & Richardson here. Just a very potent combination.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:17 pm

we all know about fish, what about finnegan makes it a sinking ship?

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:25 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:31 pm

NYAssociate wrote:Regarding Finnegan, it's just stuff I've been hearing around. An obvious factor is that it's not that well diversified, given how focused it is on IP, which could create problems (and apparently has) in the event of a downturn. Unless you're working at a litigation boutique, I think it's always better to be part of a practice group at a full service firm, as there are opportunities to bill hours in related areas if you can't find work, and thus opportunities to avoid getting laid off.

From ATL
Finnegan freezes and slashes salaries: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/10/whats-go ... henderson/
Finnegan promotes only 4 to equity partnership: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/11/new-part ... p-for-you/
Finnegan no-offers half of its 2009 summer class: http://abovethelaw.com/2009/10/whats-go ... henderson/


LOL if you think F&R and Finnegan are "sinking ships," then you either (1) must work at WLRK or (2) are a bitter idiot who probably got Lathamed (and does nothing but troll ATL from the couch) and is just bashing every firm while unemployed.

ITE, OP should be proud and enthusiastic about his/her CB with either firm. Good luck OP.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:38 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

radek
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2010 2:05 am

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby radek » Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:13 am

TBF, Fish really IS a sinking ship.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Fish & Richardson v. Finnegan

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Sep 06, 2010 12:15 am

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.