FTC Bureau of Competition or DOJ Antitrust Division? Forum

[What the f.supp?]

Does anyone have any guess/input as to which is better to work for (in terms of exiting to a large private firm or large corp after a few years)? Is one harder to get into?

I am convinced they are equals but my buddy thinks that FTC is superior (read: prestigious) in some esoteric regard. We were talking about the DC branches of these agencies.

Thanks!

[bmontminy]

curious to the answer to this as well

[bdubs]

I think FTC gets a bit of a bump because it handles health care and a lot of tech. Since those are two of the sexier areas for antitrust at the moment it probably gets somewhat better exit options. I think if you have a chosen industry of interest, you should pick the one with general oversight.

I personally think the DOJ name has more resume cache, but that is outside of the scope of antitrust work, not within it.

[CandyLand]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think FTC is better for investigations and the DOJ is better for litigation.

[Borhas]

The FTC has no teeth, the DOJ does, but that's about all I know

[Anonymous User]

Any anecdotal information for how easy it is to lateral to biglaw after a few years in either of them?

[bdubs]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think FTC is better for investigations and the DOJ is better for litigation.

Antitrust division doesn't handle most of the litigation, it passes that off to civil division.

[bdubs]

The FTC has no teeth, the DOJ does, but that's about all I know

That is complete BS, I think the FTC is the more aggressive of the two at the moment. Leibowitz has taken some pretty strong stands on issues like generic entry patent settlements, and made a lot of commotion around Google.

[Borhas]

The FTC has no teeth, the DOJ does, but that's about all I know

That is complete BS, I think the FTC is the more aggressive of the two at the moment. Leibowitz has taken some pretty strong stands on issues like generic entry patent settlements, and made a lot of commotion around Google.

aggressive in doing what?

[bdubs]

The FTC has no teeth, the DOJ does, but that's about all I know

That is complete BS, I think the FTC is the more aggressive of the two at the moment. Leibowitz has taken some pretty strong stands on issues like generic entry patent settlements, and made a lot of commotion around Google.

aggressive in doing what?

Pursuing enforcement actions

[Anonymous User]

Any anecdotal information for how easy it is to lateral to biglaw after a few years in either of them?

Nothing on this?

[Anonymous User]

Any anecdotal information for how easy it is to lateral to biglaw after a few years in either of them?

Nothing on this?

It's extremely easy to lateral to biglaw from any of the litigating branches of DOJ (Civil, Criminal, Antitrust, Tax, and the US Attorney's Offices). In fact, you have a significantly higher chance of making partner if you have worked for DOJ than someone who went straight to the firm as an associate and tries to work their way up.

[Anonymous User]

Former FTC BC paralegal here: there aren't a huge number of laterals out of the Bureau of Competition, but I'd say those who did leave for biglaw tended to do so after a huge case (Whole Foods / Wild Oats, CCC / Mitchell, Exxon / Mobil).

[Anonymous User]

Former FTC BC paralegal here: there aren't a huge number of laterals out of the Bureau of Competition, but I'd say those who did leave for biglaw tended to do so after a huge case (Whole Foods / Wild Oats, CCC / Mitchell, Exxon / Mobil).

That makes sense and goes with something else I've heard about laterals from federal agencies: law firms place a premium on all the connections you've presumably made.

[Borhas]

The FTC has no teeth, the DOJ does, but that's about all I know

That is complete BS, I think the FTC is the more aggressive of the two at the moment. Leibowitz has taken some pretty strong stands on issues like generic entry patent settlements, and made a lot of commotion around Google.

aggressive in doing what?

Pursuing enforcement actions

enforcement actions=teeth

if they are just cease and desist letters then they're not very sharp teeth are they?

Aggression=/= teeth... but who cares

[bdubs]

enforcement actions=teeth

if they are just cease and desist letters then they're not very sharp teeth are they?

Aggression=/= teeth... but who cares

Whether the action goes all the way to trial or not has no bearing on whether it influences competition. Pursuing more enforcement actions generally means more settlements both with parties to the transactions as well as with other parties who don't want to go through lengthy court battles.

[Julio_El_Chavo]

if you get offers from both, you must be one of the top 10-20 law students in the nation.

[Anonymous User]

I'm looking at this decision out of law school. I thought I'd bump this rather than starting a new thread, but these responses from three years ago weren't especially helpful. Does anyone familiar with antitrust enforcement, the antitrust bar and the DC legal market have anything to add? I understand the differences in their enforcement approaches (independent agency versus arm of the executive branch), what would be the relative advantages from an entry-level attorney's perspective? General prestige? Any difference in lateral opportunities to private sector down the road? Not sure I'm interested in the latter but would like to know my potential options.

[Anonymous User]

You really can't go wrong either way. It depends on what industries you're interested in though. If you are interested in tech or healtchare, FTC is the way to go. If communications or banking, DOJ. Both have phenomenal exit options to in-house and law firms. Literally every attorney I worked with when I interned in at BC in law school has left to take an amazing in-house role at a tech company or as a partner in biglaw. FTC is much less politically influenced than DOJ and generally more aggressive, as someone mentioned. And whoever said FTC has no teeth is completely wrong. It can often stop a merger by just threatening to file a complaint. Also, FTC pays significantly better than DOJ and nearly everyone is a GS-15 within 5-6 years.

[Anonymous User]

You really can't go wrong either way. It depends on what industries you're interested in though. If you are interested in tech or healtchare, FTC is the way to go. If communications or banking, DOJ. Both have phenomenal exit options to in-house and law firms. Literally every attorney I worked with when I interned in at BC in law school has left to take an amazing in-house role or as a partner in biglaw. FTC is much less politically influenced than DOJ and generally more aggressive, as someone mentioned. And whoever said FTC has no teeth is completely wrong. It can often stop a merger by just threatening to file a complaint. Also, FTC pays significantly better than DOJ and nearly everyone is a GS-15 within 5-6 years.

Thanks. Very helpful. Especially the pay. Noticed the pay difference for entry-level attorneys and was wondering if it continued through the years. Sounds like it does.

[Anonymous User]

tl;dr but only the DOJ can send someone to prison for a criminal antitrust violation.

just sayin.