yellowjacket2012 wrote:I didn't realize it was that hard to get a patent prosecution gig from a top 20 law school if one has satisfied all patent bar requirements and is deemed fit to prosecute patents before the PTO.
If there's data showing that Option B/C result in unemployment, and are therefore highly questionable options designed to increase unemployment statistics and fill up the PTO's coffers, then yes, I redact my patent prosecution advice.
When graduates of T20 law schools with CS, Bio, and ME degrees can't find patent prosecution jobs, do you really think someone without a technical degree has a chance? Common sense, man.
This isn't a "common sense" matter, man, but thanks for taking the low road, its an easy road to take. Its more of an employment statistics matter.
I personally know of no data that supports what you're saying. Patent prosecution jobs don't require high law grades because patent prosecution does not require expertise with substantive law across disciplines. If you happen to know for a fact that a lot of t20 grades with tech backgrounds can't find patent prosecution jobs, then yes - you're right. I personally don't think this is accurate based purely on my anecdotal data, my experience at my IP boutique this past summer, etc.
If anything, patent firms complain that most top law school graduates want to do litigation instead of prosecution because of more $$, and because they're top law school students and they have those options available.