OCI - 3.45 at USC Forum

[vizio24]

Median is obviously considered 3.3 even though we only know the mean per class is 3.3

Thoughts on success at OCI? Bidding only LA.

I've heard a lot of the firms with 3.3 min GPA requirements actually don't take anyone below a 3.4, so perhaps a 3.45 isn't that good, but still solid.

[glitter178]

I'm interested in this as well. I have a 3.54 and want only LA.

[071816]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

[glitter178]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

Where are the class sizes listed?

[071816]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

Where are the class sizes listed?

NALP Directory has past class sizes and projected class size for most firms.

[vizio24]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

CSO's emailed numbers are way off because their below 3.4 category includes a lot of IP and diversity hires and is based on whether a firm hired at least ONE person in the previous 5 years, not ITE.

I know a few current 2nd year associates at a several firms in LA (yes I am old). They put me in contact with their partners and I ended up having lunch with one at a firm I won't disclose (because its very small for a big firm), and one at Sheppard Mullin. The partner at the one I won't disclose said he hasn't ever hired anyone with a 3.3 from USC (Simplicity listing them as a 3.3 min firm), and the Sheppard Mullin partner was bashing the lottery process because he said he doesnt even want to interview people "noticeably below 3.4, unless they have a real excuse as to why they have average grades."

I was pretty stunned.

[glitter178]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

CSO's emailed numbers are way off because their below 3.4 category includes a lot of IP and diversity hires and is based on whether a firm hired at least ONE person in the previous 5 years, not ITE.

I know a few current 2nd year associates at a several firms in LA (yes I am old). They put me in contact with their partners and I ended up having lunch with one at a firm I won't disclose (because its very small for a big firm), and one at Sheppard Mullin. The partner at the one I won't disclose said he hasn't ever hired anyone with a 3.3 from USC (Simplicity listing them as a 3.3 min firm), and the Sheppard Mullin partner was bashing the lottery process because he said he doesnt even want to interview people "noticeably below 3.4, unless they have a real excuse as to why they have average grades."

I was pretty stunned.

Yikes.

[071816]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

CSO's emailed numbers are way off because their below 3.4 category includes a lot of IP and diversity hires and is based on whether a firm hired at least ONE person in the previous 5 years, not ITE.

I know a few current 2nd year associates at a several firms in LA (yes I am old). They put me in contact with their partners and I ended up having lunch with one at a firm I won't disclose (because its very small for a big firm), and one at Sheppard Mullin. The partner at the one I won't disclose said he hasn't ever hired anyone with a 3.3 from USC (Simplicity listing them as a 3.3 min firm), and the Sheppard Mullin partner was bashing the lottery process because he said he doesnt even want to interview people "noticeably below 3.4, unless they have a real excuse as to why they have average grades."

I was pretty stunned.

Yikes.

+1. This whole process is so weird and inefficient. Also, to be fair, at least a few of those years do include post-2008. It would be good to see how many people in a give range at a given firm were hired. At least one in the past five years is pretty misleadling.

[Anonymous User]

[quote="vizio24"][quote="chimp"]I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.[/quote]


CSO's emailed numbers are way off because their below 3.4 category includes a lot of IP and diversity hires and is based on whether a firm hired at least ONE person in the previous 5 years, not ITE.

I know a few current 2nd year associates at a several firms in LA (yes I am old). They put me in contact with their partners and I ended up having lunch with one at a firm I won't disclose (because its very small for a big firm), and one at Sheppard Mullin. The partner at the one I won't disclose said he hasn't ever hired anyone with a 3.3 from USC (Simplicity listing them as a 3.3 min firm), and the Sheppard Mullin partner was bashing the lottery process because he said he doesnt even want to interview people "noticeably below 3.4, unless they have a real excuse as to why they have average grades."

I was pretty stunned.[/quote]

WTF, why even bother listing 3.3 minimum then? Why don't they list it higher?

[glitter178]

I mean, email the CSO and they'll let you know who has hired within your range in previous years. After that, personality and other intangibles will determine a lot. I would love to hear from USC folks who have gone through the process in the past though.

eta: It's scary that lots of LA firms have such small summer class sizes.

CSO's emailed numbers are way off because their below 3.4 category includes a lot of IP and diversity hires and is based on whether a firm hired at least ONE person in the previous 5 years, not ITE.

I know a few current 2nd year associates at a several firms in LA (yes I am old). They put me in contact with their partners and I ended up having lunch with one at a firm I won't disclose (because its very small for a big firm), and one at Sheppard Mullin. The partner at the one I won't disclose said he hasn't ever hired anyone with a 3.3 from USC (Simplicity listing them as a 3.3 min firm), and the Sheppard Mullin partner was bashing the lottery process because he said he doesnt even want to interview people "noticeably below 3.4, unless they have a real excuse as to why they have average grades."

I was pretty stunned.

WTF, why even bother listing 3.3 minimum then? Why don't they list it higher?

To give people a false sense of hope?

[sequins]

tag
(wanna see what the prospects are =S)

[Anonymous User]

WTF, why even bother listing 3.3 minimum then? Why don't they list it higher?

Perhaps they are just too lazy to change their cutoff for individual schools. The cutoff is also usually 3.3 at UCLA (where the curve is 3.2 and thus the cutoff more realistic). Then at T14's there is no cutoff listed? Just a guess.

[Anonymous User]

Basically in the same boat. I spoke to a rising 3L who didn't have any crazy WE/softs and had a 3.5 last year, ended up with 11 interviews and a few callbacks, and one offer which (s)/he accepted.

I think most people 3.4+ get around 8-12 interviews and 2-3 callbacks. The 3L said the only people (s)/he knew who didn't end up with a job from OCI had <3.0-3.2 GPAs.

Whatever that's worth.

[vizio24]

Basically in the same boat. I spoke to a rising 3L who didn't have any crazy WE/softs and had a 3.5 last year, ended up with 11 interviews and a few callbacks, and one offer which (s)/he accepted.

I think most people 3.4+ get around 8-12 interviews and 2-3 callbacks. The 3L said the only people (s)/he knew who didn't end up with a job from OCI had <3.0-3.2 GPAs.

Whatever that's worth.

I realllllly hope 3.45+ is enough to comfortably land a biglaw job. That's gotta be somewhere around the top 1/3 of the class...and considering 40% of last year's 2L's got summer associate jobs (but that includes IP and diversity hires), top 1/3 should be good.....right?

[JJDancer]

I realllllly hope 3.45+ is enough to comfortably land a biglaw job. That's gotta be somewhere around the top 1/3 of the class...and considering 40% of last year's 2L's got summer associate jobs (but that includes IP and diversity hires), top 1/3 should be good.....right?

I think 3.45+ will likely land a biglaw SA but I wouldn't say "comfortably." But I might be a bit more pessimistic.

[071816]

I realllllly hope 3.45+ is enough to comfortably land a biglaw job. That's gotta be somewhere around the top 1/3 of the class...and considering 40% of last year's 2L's got summer associate jobs (but that includes IP and diversity hires), top 1/3 should be good.....right?

I think 3.45+ will likely land a biglaw SA but I wouldn't say "comfortably." But I might be a bit more pessimistic.

Also, unlike law school admissions, firm recruiting isn't a straight numbers game at 95% of firms. From what I've gathered, top half at USC has a shot at some type of S.A. (maybe even lower if tech background, etc.). Top third and up has a very good shot, but personality and fit seem to matter a great deal as well (unless we're talking about firms like Irell who seem to be willing to hire anyone with a pulse if they have top 10% grades and law review).