patent litigation to 180k?

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:29 pm

Is it about time? Or will that be too disruptive, rendering the Desmarais move irrelevant? All it takes, folks, is one firm - say - Kirkland - to do this. And they get all the star patent lit candidates. Right now, they compete with maybe a half-dozen other elite litigation firms for the same candidates, and then maybe 50 other so-so patent groups throughout the V100.

I'm hearing some chatter at my firm that they're going to give headhunters a higher fee for landing qualified patent litigation laterals. But just chatter at this point. Will not identify firm.

Some firms already pay higher bonus for CAFC clerks.

WolfmansBrother
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:42 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby WolfmansBrother » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Is it about time? Or will that be too disruptive? All it takes, folks, is one firm - say - Kirkland - to do this. And they get all the star patent lit candidates. Right now, they compete with maybe a half-dozen other elite litigation firms for the same candidates, and then maybe 50 other so-so patent groups throughout the V100.

I'm hearing some chatter at my firm that they're going to give headhunters a higher fee for landing qualified patent litigation laterals. But just chatter at this point. Will not identify firm.

Some firms already pay higher bonus for CAFC clerks.


I'd be surprised if a firm with diversified practices like Kirkland decided to raise only one group's salary. Granted, there are certain requirements/skills to be a patent litigator, but it still sends a mixed message over the value the firm places on certain employees work. I don't agree with that - that it sends such a message, however, it will likely cause other associates to be upset. Raising IP lit. salaries would be the crack needed to bring the 180 floodgates down for everyone.

In other words, aside from boutique IP-only firms ( as we've already seen), when 180 happens, it will be for everyone.

As for the CAFC clerk argument, this preferential treatment only applies to associates that also clerked on other courts. Not the same kind of disparate treatment.

I don't see it happening.

User avatar
Julio_El_Chavo
Posts: 803
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Julio_El_Chavo » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:54 pm

There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

johndhi
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:25 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby johndhi » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:55 pm

It's an interesting idea that makes sense to me. Patent Lit has been the growing engine for a lot of firms lately (Quinn, Kirkland, Weil) and from what I've heard it has been probably the busiest practice group at most firms - would make sense to me

Agent
Posts: 340
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 2:03 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Agent » Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:59 pm

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.


This is true.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:13 pm

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.
There are Vault firms that do this in some sub-160 markets as well, even firms that are tops in their respective home markets, they just aren't NY-based V10s.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:19 pm

Is Finnegan back to market yet?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:25 pm

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

Such as

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Is Finnegan back to market yet?

Wat finnegan went under market???

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby 09042014 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:34 pm

I think you'd see bonuses before you see them going 180K. Desmaris is too small to set the market, and KE is already getting top talent. You'll see the midrange IP firms trying to poach with signing bonuses, etc etc, before you see a large salary change.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Is Finnegan back to market yet?


Yes.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Is Finnegan back to market yet?

Wat finnegan went under market???


Briefly.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

Such as


See NALP directory for Kilpatrick Townsend (Atlanta).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:20 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

Such as


See NALP directory for Kilpatrick Townsend (Atlanta).
Along with at least 1 other ATL firm as well (the info isn't on NALP, was told in an interview by an associate), and I know of at least 1 regional biglaw firm in St. Louis that does the same thing for IP associates.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:39 pm

I know someone who successfully negotiated at 180K start with a V50. I had no idea that was even possible.

User avatar
cantaboot
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:12 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby cantaboot » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:46 pm

abt negotiation: had the said person worked as a student attorney at the firm before he/she finished law school?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I know someone who successfully negotiated at 180K start with a V50. I had no idea that was even possible.


Were they bringing in business? Advanced degree or registration number?

User avatar
Julio_El_Chavo
Posts: 803
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 11:09 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Julio_El_Chavo » Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

Such as


http://www.nalpdirectory.com

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I know someone who successfully negotiated at 180K start with a V50. I had no idea that was even possible.


Were they bringing in business? Advanced degree or registration number?
No business and no registration. But very prestigious advanced degree and work experience, and excellent LS grades at non-T14.

ETA: Edited the above, was too specific. Sorry. To poster below, thank you, much appreciated.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:45 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:I know someone who successfully negotiated at 180K start with a V50. I had no idea that was even possible.


Were they bringing in business? Advanced degree or registration number?
[redacted]


Interesting. Thank you for responding.

[Edit: redacted in case you decide that was too much info]

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby fatduck » Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:43 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Julio_El_Chavo wrote:There are non-top firms that already pay entry-level patent attorneys more than other entry level attorneys.

Such as


See NALP directory for Kilpatrick Townsend (Atlanta).
Along with at least 1 other ATL firm as well (the info isn't on NALP, was told in an interview by an associate), and I know of at least 1 regional biglaw firm in St. Louis that does the same thing for IP associates.

you're not gonna tell us the firms?

also, Alston Bird ATL NALP says "$160,000 base salary for Patent Bar members working in our IP area."

User avatar
Big Shrimpin
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Big Shrimpin » Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:22 am

+1 to A&B. I know a breh working in one of their offices. They start at like 145K, but patent bar gives DAT 15K boost to 160K.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby fatduck » Sat Sep 01, 2012 10:39 am

Big Shrimpin wrote:+1 to A&B. I know a breh working in one of their offices. They start at like 145K, but patent bar gives DAT 15K boost to 160K.

160k in atlanta is a pretty sick salary. they pay that for all patent barred IP people, or just prosecutors?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273586
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:19 am

Strong rumors of base rases at one big firm in NYC. All I can say. Keep hope alive.

User avatar
Big Shrimpin
Posts: 2468
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 12:35 pm

Re: patent litigation to 180k?

Postby Big Shrimpin » Sat Sep 01, 2012 11:26 am

fatduck wrote:
Big Shrimpin wrote:+1 to A&B. I know a breh working in one of their offices. They start at like 145K, but patent bar gives DAT 15K boost to 160K.

160k in atlanta is a pretty sick salary. they pay that for all patent barred IP people, or just prosecutors?


I think it's anyone, IIRC. TSO jelly of my bro, because he's in a secondary/tertiary city with middle-of-the-road debt and will thus be BALLING out of control down there. LOLNYCFML




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.