Can someone explain to a -1L / 0L why IP gets its own Forum

[Anonymous User]

category, when it comes to hiring?

Is it notoriously easy to get biglaw jobs in IP or something? Could someone explain?

[chem]

category, when it comes to hiring?

Is it notoriously easy to get biglaw jobs in IP or something? Could someone explain?

There is a separate exam that you have to take in order to do patent prosecution, and you need certain things to be eligible for taking that exam (patent bar). Just a smaller pool of people, so there is less competition for jobs. Could be changing though

[zomginternets]

a lot of firms expect you to have a hard science background for IP. Since there are relatively few biology majors who decided to go to law school after undergrad, there is a low supply of them. So it is "easy" in the sense that if you have those qualifications, many firms are interested in you that otherwise wouldn't be, but not so easy in the sense that you have 0 shot of even getting interviewed for a hard-IP position if you don't have a hard science background.

[Anonymous User]

OP here - Makes sense, and is good news for me! Thank you.

[Anonymous User]

Is it also because IP is a big area of law?

2L here going into IP litigation. I had a polysci degree but strong WE and self-taught CS. Still, it was crazy hard to break into IP and could only do lit (although, I only wanted to do lit).

Let's just say if I ever have kids, I will do all I can to steer them towards a math or science UG degree.

[Doritos]

Let's just say if I ever have kids, I will do all I can to steer them towards a math or science UG degree.

TRUTH

[dougroberts]

But not all IP practices require a hard science undergrad (including in copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and technology/licensing), though still some firms will prefer a hard science background in these areas. But from what I have heard, outside of patents, a hard science background is not helpful in other IP areas (e.g., a biology major has nothing to do with trademarks). If anything, be technologically savvy is more important. This depends firm-by-firm as some are more picky in all areas of IP whereas others are not so much.

Another reason for why IP has its own category is that there is growth in this area. In some parts of the country, patents are a big deal (California, Texas, Minnesota, etc.). Also, technology licensing, etc. is growing (relative to stagnant practices like real estate).

[Anonymous User]

Aside from litigation, what other type of work is there?

Keep in mind I'm... very new to all of this. Thought I'd just ask dumb questions while my topic is near the top.

[c3pO4]

Aside from litigation, what other type of work is there?

Keep in mind I'm... very new to all of this. Thought I'd just ask dumb questions while my topic is near the top.

There's litigation, patent licensing and technology transfer, and patent prosecution (filing patents and arguing in front of the patent board of examiners).

[englawyer]

i would say it IS significantly easier to get a biglaw job in IP. for example, Loyola PLIP is entirely for IP candidates..people with the right background clean up there, even if they go to a lower ranked school. There are also some large firms that are focused only on IP (Fish, Finnegan, Knobbe Martens, Kenyon, Fitzpatrick, etc). You have a leg up on the competition for those for obvious reasons...