San Francisco - Top 7 Big Law Firms Forum

[Anonymous User]

I can take other questions on SF firms if you have them.

If someone wants to do white-collar work, what SF (by SF, I mean Bay Area: SF, SJ, Palo Alto) firms should I be looking at? I have heard Gibson Dunn and the above-mentioned Keker and Van Nest, but am only beginning my research. I guess relatedly while I want SF, I want to do white-collar more, so does it make sense to primarily target SF or should I be looking at other markets (such as NY or DC)?

I am as of this moment top 5% BMVPDCNG with really really strong ties to SF. Thanks for your (or anyone who can share) help!

Good to see this thread resurface. I'm in a similar position to this anon, top 5% at T-14 and great ties to SF. I'm not into white collar, but the strong lit places I'm looking are

-Quinn
-Gibson
-OMM
-Kirkland
-MoFo

I think other places that would be cool are Keker and Munger. Altshuler is more employment work and, I think, often plaintiffs'. Not white collar as far as I know, but I don't know much. Someone above said Kirkland SF doesn't do litigation and that's ENTIRELY WRONG. Half of their practice is lit; within that, half is IP lit, half general. I think my favorite so far has been Quinn, but I'm worried about their sweat shop reputation. Anyone know which one of these firms will WORK YOU THE HARDEST? I'm not afraid of hard work, but don't want to be taken advantage of.

Oh, one firm that has been missing from this thread is FARELLA, BRAUN + MARTEL, one of the top litigation firms in the area, but a smaller/regional firm.

I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on these firms.

[Anonymous User]

need more info on orrick, specifically in s.v.

[Anonymous User]

any info about these firms?

Kirkland, IP litigation, SV office (although i was told SV and SF work very closely together on this. interviewees get to choose based on their geographic preference.)
Quinn, IP litigation, SF office
MoFo, patent prosecution (EE, not bio/life sciences), SV+SF

thanks!!

[Anonymous User]

any info about these firms?

Kirkland, IP litigation, SV office (although i was told SV and SF work very closely together on this. interviewees get to choose based on their geographic preference.)
Quinn, IP litigation, SF office
MoFo, patent prosecution (EE, not bio/life sciences), SV+SF

thanks!!

Re Quinn v Kirkland:

Both are great IP Lit departments, but I think your life as an associate will be substantially different between these firms. Quinn seems to emphasize learning by doing which gives you lots of early responsibility, while Kirkland emphasizes formal training which could suit your style better. Quinn has a less stuffy/formal culture, but you might appreciate "feeling like a lawyer" and the more professional feel of Kirkland. Finally, Quinn seems to have more hours, even though both places are known for working hard.

[Anonymous User]

What's the inside word on WSGR? I want to do litigation but may not have any options aside from their Palo Alto office in the NorCal area, which is where I want to go (top 20% east coast T25, strong ties to CA). I really like the firm but concerned about litigation opportunities. Thoughts?

[Anonymous User]

What's the inside word on WSGR? I want to do litigation but may not have any options aside from their Palo Alto office in the NorCal area, which is where I want to go (top 20% east coast T25, strong ties to CA). I really like the firm but concerned about litigation opportunities. Thoughts?

I know that WSGR just lost six IP litigation partners to Latham. My sense is that, for Palo Alto, Cooley has a more active IP lit practice than does WSGR.

Still, it's not like WSGR is focused exclusively on corporate work. If you've got a job there, and if you're interested in pursuing litigation, you should have opportunities.

[Anonymous User]

any info about these firms?

Kirkland, IP litigation, SV office (although i was told SV and SF work very closely together on this. interviewees get to choose based on their geographic preference.)
Quinn, IP litigation, SF office
MoFo, patent prosecution (EE, not bio/life sciences), SV+SF

thanks!!

Re Quinn v Kirkland:

Both are great IP Lit departments, but I think your life as an associate will be substantially different between these firms. Quinn seems to emphasize learning by doing which gives you lots of early responsibility, while Kirkland emphasizes formal training which could suit your style better. Quinn has a less stuffy/formal culture, but you might appreciate "feeling like a lawyer" and the more professional feel of Kirkland. Finally, Quinn seems to have more hours, even though both places are known for working hard.

cool, thanks!

so how would you guys respond if the interviewer hints "we work longer hours than other firms"?
have seen multiple posts on TLS saying Quinn is a sweat shop.

[Anonymous User]

any info about these firms?

Kirkland, IP litigation, SV office (although i was told SV and SF work very closely together on this. interviewees get to choose based on their geographic preference.)
Quinn, IP litigation, SF office
MoFo, patent prosecution (EE, not bio/life sciences), SV+SF

thanks!!

Re Quinn v Kirkland:

Both are great IP Lit departments, but I think your life as an associate will be substantially different between these firms. Quinn seems to emphasize learning by doing which gives you lots of early responsibility, while Kirkland emphasizes formal training which could suit your style better. Quinn has a less stuffy/formal culture, but you might appreciate "feeling like a lawyer" and the more professional feel of Kirkland. Finally, Quinn seems to have more hours, even though both places are known for working hard.

cool, thanks!

so how would you guys respond if the interviewer hints "we work longer hours than other firms"?
have seen multiple posts on TLS saying Quinn is a sweat shop.

I'm sort of struggling with whether Quinn does work longer hours than the other SF firms. Can anyone give us more evidence that this is the case? My feeling is that Quinn has the best IP lit in the bay, by the way.

As for patent prosecution, I didn't even know MoFo did it. I know Townsend does it. I hear it isn't particularly fun to do. Knobbe Martens is pretty good in that area IIRC.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Shartsis? A kinder, gentler law firm?

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Shartsis? A kinder, gentler law firm?

Good rep overall, at least amongst the judges I've talked to. Quality work, nice environment.

That said, radio silence from my mass mail letter.

[Anonymous User]

I am quoting a post from May. I'm bothering to respond now because the thread is still active and there is quite a bit of incorrect and incomplete information in the post.

for the whole bay area (including SV):
Fenwick: strong VC and IPO, small, SV firm.

Fenwick is small in the sense that it's not a national firm, but its Mountain View office is the second largest in the Silicon Valley, with over 250 attorneys. (Only WSGR is bigger.)

Kirkland: v10, does almost exclusivity private equity in SF (no litigation)

This is incorrect. Kirkland does plenty of litigation—both IP and commercial—out of its SF office.

Gibson: middling palo alto practice, all litigation in SF

This is also incorrect. Gibson does lit out of its Palo Alto office.

Cooley: smallish tech firm, very strong in the life sciences

Cooley is not a huge national firm, but they are, after WSGR and Fenwick, the third largest office in the Silicon Valley, with about 200 attorneys. In addition to being strong in life sciences, they're strong in patent lit.

[lawschoolfiasco]

[deleted]

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Shartsis? A kinder, gentler law firm?

Good rep overall, at least amongst the judges I've talked to. Quality work, nice environment.

That said, radio silence from my mass mail letter.

Had a callback there a couple weeks ago but haven't heard back. They made it very clear that if you are looking for an easier environment, Shartsis is not the place for you. Many people said things like "there's no place to hide." So you can never coast like you might be able to occasionally at a bigger firm. They are extremely lean in staff.

[Anonymous User]

The Kirkland thing was a clear error. Everything else in that post was spot on. The Gibson thing you don't really disagree with his statement, and the Cooley characterization was correct, though maybe he should have said "less nationally known" instead of "smaller." I think in general it was a very informative post and people should rely on it.

I am quoting a post from May. I'm bothering to respond now because the thread is still active and there is quite a bit of incorrect and incomplete information in the post.

for the whole bay area (including SV):
Fenwick: strong VC and IPO, small, SV firm.

Fenwick is small in the sense that it's not a national firm, but its Mountain View office is the second largest in the Silicon Valley, with over 250 attorneys. (Only WSGR is bigger.)

Kirkland: v10, does almost exclusivity private equity in SF (no litigation)

This is incorrect. Kirkland does plenty of litigation—both IP and commercial—out of its SF office.

Gibson: middling palo alto practice, all litigation in SF

This is also incorrect. Gibson does lit out of its Palo Alto office.

Cooley: smallish tech firm, very strong in the life sciences

Cooley is not a huge national firm, but they are, after WSGR and Fenwick, the third largest office in the Silicon Valley, with about 200 attorneys. In addition to being strong in life sciences, they're strong in patent lit.

[Anonymous User]

Interested in Patent Prosecution (Life Science) in SF+SV.

If you had to choose one between these three:
MoFo (SV) - 1800 billable for Patent Prosecution (read this in chamber-associates, is this true)?
WSGR (SV) - Heavy focus on emerging tech, but heavy work schedule?
Cooley (SF) - Great life science practice

I know the general consensus is all three are good, but can anyone give me more info (i.e. billable hours - patent prosecution, partner likability, and/or any other general info)?

Any info would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks

[Anonymous User]

thanks for the previous advice - Can I ask whether your what your insight on all the SF firms is based on? working experience, friends, etc?
Any thoughts on Morgan Lewis, Reed Smith, Crowell for general lit?
Thanks!

[johndhi]

thanks for the previous advice - Can I ask whether your what your insight on all the SF firms is based on? working experience, friends, etc?
Any thoughts on Morgan Lewis, Reed Smith, Crowell for general lit?
Thanks!

I have a friend who used to be at Morgan Lewis who said general lit is ... not enjoyable at this point. But he's pretty jaded, generally.

Curious to hear people's opinions on Quinn SF and Gibson SF. And why hasn't OMM been mentioned?

[Anonymous User]

thanks for the previous advice - Can I ask whether your what your insight on all the SF firms is based on? working experience, friends, etc?
Any thoughts on Morgan Lewis, Reed Smith, Crowell for general lit?
Thanks!

I have a friend who used to be at Morgan Lewis who said general lit is ... not enjoyable at this point. But he's pretty jaded, generally.

Curious to hear people's opinions on Quinn SF and Gibson SF. And why hasn't OMM been mentioned?

Thanks - does not enjoyable mean horrible hours, bad morale, other?

[johndhi]

thanks for the previous advice - Can I ask whether your what your insight on all the SF firms is based on? working experience, friends, etc?
Any thoughts on Morgan Lewis, Reed Smith, Crowell for general lit?
Thanks!

I have a friend who used to be at Morgan Lewis who said general lit is ... not enjoyable at this point. But he's pretty jaded, generally.

Curious to hear people's opinions on Quinn SF and Gibson SF. And why hasn't OMM been mentioned?

Thanks - does not enjoyable mean horrible hours, bad morale, other?

Morale, I think. He was there after the big firm (from the East coast) bought the West Coast firm; he felt like it was being ruled from a distance and that partnership prospects weren't great in SF for that reason.

[Anonymous User]

Re IP lit, anyone interested should take a long look at MoFo. They're IP lit department is huge. They do all of Apple's IP litigation which has been huge latley with suit against samsung.

They also have a solid patent prosecution practice - very interested in hiring people with PhD and other hard science backgrounds.

[Anonymous User]

.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Shartsis? A kinder, gentler law firm?

I had a callback there as well. I've heard that you'll work fewer hours, but they'll be harder hours b/c you'll get more responsibility early. Additionally, they get you started on business development right away. They require you to spend certain number of hours at mingles and etc. and give you a credit card for lunches; the expectation being that you obviously won't be landing clients as a junior associate, but you'll have good foundation to do try doing so when you're at year 6-8, etc.

In all, I really, really, really liked Shartsis. You probably will not get experience working on 20-attorney bet-the-company litigation. But you almost certainly will be a better, or at least more well-rounded, lawyer after working your first 5 years there compared to most BigLaw shops.

[Anonymous User]

If anyone knows information about Howard Rice, I have a CB there next week, and I'd love to hear what people have heard about it.

[Anonymous User]

Any thoughts on Shartsis? A kinder, gentler law firm?

Good rep overall, at least amongst the judges I've talked to. Quality work, nice environment.

That said, radio silence from my mass mail letter.

Had a callback there a couple weeks ago but haven't heard back. They made it very clear that if you are looking for an easier environment, Shartsis is not the place for you. Many people said things like "there's no place to hide." So you can never coast like you might be able to occasionally at a bigger firm. They are extremely lean in staff.

just got dinged via email after a shartsis callback. they're really cool - pay market, and a lot of early training. a big drawback is that they expect their associates to start pulling in business right away (it's how their small business model is sustainable) - but i have no idea how its possible to bring in large clients as a 1st year associate... and im sure my questions on that led to my ding, haha

[Anonymous User]

If anyone knows information about Howard Rice, I have a CB there next week, and I'd love to hear what people have heard about it.

Don't know much, but I've been at their offices and had a screening interview with them. Couldn't get the CB, so not much help on that end. What I know or have heard is the following: Very selective with grades. Very nice people, at least the ones I met with. They've done a number of fairly important/highly publicized cases so there's a chance you might want to know if your interviewer worked on some of them. IIRC they have no real practice groups internally (they have practice groups listed on their website, but don't really adhere to that within the firm), you're either lit or corp (not 100% sure about this, but I seem to recall that being mentioned).