Anonymous User wrote:Oh geez. And I completely made my court preference matrix in excel based on that list. Oh well. That's what I get for thinkin' too hard, I guess. Do you know if any of these are probably not available this year: Buffalo, Detroit, Bloomington, Boston, and Baltimore?
Sorry I edited my above response - I added:
Tucson and Florence only have 2 judges, so even though they each have an AA right now (a second year clerk) perhaps HQ feels like those clerks would be better placed elsewhere. It's also puzzling why they would put a clerk in Imperial when there's only one IJ there... But Salt Lake City has a clerk right now and there's only one IJ there. There is no way they would have two clerks at a court with only one judge. There is just no way that would make any sense at all. In sum, this is not the final list...
I can tell you:
Detroit has 4 judges and 1 current first year clerk.
Bloomington has 3 judges and 2 second year clerks. (they will definitely need at least one new person)
Boston has 6 judges and 2 first year clerks.
Baltimore has 5 judges and has 1 first year clerk.
You can raise your own conclusions with those numbers. I have only given my opinion on Bloomington. You will get the final list in your interview, and even then it may be subject to change based on openings/closings/etc. This isn't an exact science.
Stop updating your excel matrix! Also I think I am done guessing here about everything. I've given you a lot of info and everything I'm saying is just educated guesses.