UChicago OCI 2013 Forum

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:52 pm

choculamaviva wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:right below 178 no LR.

What are "safeties?"

Are non-super-selective NYC firms okay to mix in(Skadden, Weil, Latham, Jones Day, Milbank), or do I need more firms like Sheppard Mullin in my top 15?

So far I've tried to have a healthy dose of reaches (Sidley Chi, K&E Chi/NY, cleary) mixed in with mostly well-regarded, non-super-selective NYC.

Is this appropriate?
Skadden and Weil(maybe Jones too) are not safeties for someone with your numbers. They are reaches, albeit reaches that you may be able to get if you are lucky. My earlier point was that, despite their ranking, Skadden,Simpson Thatcher, etc are not super selective, i.e. you don't need a 180. This doesn't mean a medianish person is a prime candidate. Safeties would be firms that hire lots of people and are a little lower on the food chain. Off the top of my head I can't give examples. While I like Sheppard and think they would be a good bid, I think the NYC office is small-ish (maybe 40-50) and therefore probably won't have a huge summer class. Short point: almost all the firms you listed are (attainable) reaches. Please don't base your bidding on the Vault rankings. Terms like V20 don't really exist outside of the Law school/TLS/K-JD world and you will not be compensated more for V20 than V40.

Same anon.

So, besides the firms I've listed (reaches that are obtainable), what are some firms with huge classes in NYC that would be considered good safeties? How many safeties do I need to mix into my top bids?

I've mailed or included all the firms Mad Hatter has listed, but it seems that the firms with the biggest class sizes are also more-selective reaches.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:53 pm

Appreciate Input on Bidlist. Interested in Chicago/NY, leaning toward Chi, leaning toward transactional but have open mind.

Transfer in from t50 school: approx. top 5%, invited to LR at original school, 2 substantive class book awards.

Bid Number Firm Name City
1 Sullivan & Cromwell NY
2 Kirkland & Ellis Chi
3 Mayer Brown Chi
4 Davis Polk NY
5 Sidley Austin Chi
6 Milbank Tweed NY
7 Skadden Chi
8 Jenner Chi
9 Shearman & Sterling NY
10 Weil Gotsham NY
11 Chapman & Cutler Chi
12 Katten Chi
13 Cravath NY
14 Cleary NY
15 Simpson Thacher NY
16 Schiff Hardin Chi
17 Jones Day Chi
18 Paul Weis NY
19 Kirkland & Ellis NY
20 Vedder Chi
21 DLA Piper Chi
22 McDermott Chi
23 Ropes Chi
24 Reed Smith Chi
25 Latham NY
26 Debevoise NY
27 Goldberg Chi
28 Wachtell NY
29 Baker Chi
30 Winston Strawn Chi
31 Perkins Coie Chi
32 Edwards Wildman Chi
33 Drinker Biddle Chi
34 Greenberg Traurig Chi
35 Sidley Austin NY
36 Jones Day NY
37 Allen & Overy NY
38 Fried Frank NY
39 Dentons Chi
40 Barack Ferazzano Chi
41 Faegre Chi
42 Bryan Cave Chi
43 Morgan Lewis Chi
44 Dechert NY
45 Proskauer Rose NY
46 Paul Hastings Chi
47 Pillsbury Winthrop NY
48 Proskauer Rose Chi
49 K&L Gates Chi
50 Morrisson & Foerster NY

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:24 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Appreciate Input on Bidlist. Interested in Chicago/NY, leaning toward Chi, leaning toward transactional but have open mind.

Transfer in from t50 school: approx. top 5%, invited to LR at original school, 2 substantive class book awards.

You can afford to put SullCrom lower. Somewhat friendly toward transfers, but not a great place to work from what I hear.

Kirkland Chi should be high and is relatively friendly toward transfers

Same for Mayer Chi, although I would put Sidley Chi higher just because it's an objectively better Chicago firm.

Davis Polk should remain high, and they're relatively friendly toward transfers in general. Great place to work as well from what I hear.

I might move Skadden Chi a couple spots higher to be safe.

Cravath can be moved way down. You could comfortably put them in the 30s while still remaining confident about getting an interview spot. Relatively friendly toward transfers, but kind of a sucky place to work.

I would move STB up. From what I hear, a great place to work and can be friendly toward transfers.

Debevoise should be higher. Historically been relatively friendly toward transfers and strong NY corporate practice (although probably a drop down from the likes of Skadden, Cravath, Davis Polk, STB, etc.).

Wachtell could probably be literally the last firm on your list, with you still getting an interview. Although I doubt they would ever hire a transfer.

I would probably move Fried Frank and JD NY higher. Decent NY corporate practices.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:47 pm

T20 transfer, 15%. Any wasted bids?

Does anything jump out as too high or low? And any firms I shouldn't be bidding on? How many screeners should I expect from this bidlist?

1 - Davis Polk, New York
2 - Jenner, Chicago
3 - Ropes, Boston
4 - Mayer Brown, Chicago
5 - Sidley, Chicago
6 - Kirkland, Chicago
7 - V&E, Houston
8 - Baker Botts, Houston
9 - Skadden, Chicago
10 - Katten Muchin, Chicago
11 - Milbank, New York
12 - Cadwalader, New York
13 - Fried Frank, New York
14 - Simpson Thacher, New York
15 - Gibson Dunn, New York
16 - Cleary, New York
17 - Winston & Strawn, Chicago
18 - Chapman & Cutler, Chicago
19 - Latham, Chicago
20 - Schiff, Chicago
21 - Stroock, New York
22 - Locke Lord, Houston

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 10:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:T20 transfer, 15%. Any wasted bids?

Does anything jump out as too high or low? And any firms I shouldn't be bidding on? How many screeners should I expect from this bidlist?

1 - Davis Polk, New York
2 - Jenner, Chicago
3 - Ropes, Boston
4 - Mayer Brown, Chicago
5 - Sidley, Chicago
6 - Kirkland, Chicago
7 - V&E, Houston
8 - Baker Botts, Houston
9 - Skadden, Chicago
10 - Katten Muchin, Chicago
11 - Milbank, New York
12 - Cadwalader, New York
13 - Fried Frank, New York
14 - Simpson Thacher, New York
15 - Gibson Dunn, New York
16 - Cleary, New York
17 - Winston & Strawn, Chicago
18 - Chapman & Cutler, Chicago
19 - Latham, Chicago
20 - Schiff, Chicago
21 - Stroock, New York
22 - Locke Lord, Houston

I would definitely move Latham - Chicago higher. Probably would also move up STB a little. I think Kirkland and Sidley should be higher, just in case.

Mad Hatter · Post by **Mad Hatter** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:T20 transfer, 15%. Any wasted bids?

Does anything jump out as too high or low? And any firms I shouldn't be bidding on? How many screeners should I expect from this bidlist?

I doubt you'll get Milbank at that spot. They're probably going to go very high due to large class size, lack of grade selectivity, and good rep.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:32 pm

Mad Hatter wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:T20 transfer, 15%. Any wasted bids?

Does anything jump out as too high or low? And any firms I shouldn't be bidding on? How many screeners should I expect from this bidlist?
I doubt you'll get Milbank at that spot. They're probably going to go very high due to large class size, lack of grade selectivity, and good rep.

I've been told Milbank is kinda meh and they usually go around bid 18-22. I had them at 12 and was told by 2Ls/OCS that they would be safe around 16 or so.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:40 am

My friend (not a TLS member) is sitting around a 175.5 (non-URM, no journal) looking at Chi & NY for corporate/transactional work. Which firms for him/her are "must-bids," and which firms should s/he make certain to bid high?

Mad Hatter · Post by **Mad Hatter** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:09 am

Anonymous User wrote: I've been told Milbank is kinda meh and they usually go around bid 18-22. I had them at 12 and was told by 2Ls/OCS that they would be safe around 16 or so.

Interesting, thanks for sharing that. Just know that, with only 21 spots, all it takes is 20 people bidding it above you.

Mad Hatter · Post by **Mad Hatter** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:12 am

Anonymous User wrote:My friend (not a TLS member) is sitting around a 175.5 (non-URM, no journal) looking at Chi & NY for corporate/transactional work. Which firms for him/her are "must-bids," and which firms should s/he make certain to bid high?

"Your friend" should definitely mass mail. Also, there are plenty if TLS "CCN Bottom 20%"-type threads they can look at for NY firms. As for Chicago, they'll want to look for the firms that have given callbacks to those with at or below 175.5, like Greenberg Traurig.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:48 am

Mad Hatter wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: I've been told Milbank is kinda meh and they usually go around bid 18-22. I had them at 12 and was told by 2Ls/OCS that they would be safe around 16 or so.
Interesting, thanks for sharing that. Just know that, with only 21 spots, all it takes is 20 people bidding it above you.

I think it's worth bidding them in the top 10. Good mix of relatively non-grade selective and particularly solid corporate and restructuring work. They increased their class size 40% this year, putting it more in line with what they used to take pre-ITE. I don't know if that was a yield mismanagement issue or if it was the number they intended on taking, but it might signal to some people that it's a good bet for those between 177-178 (a big piece of the class) who are searching for big class sizes. Might make it go higher than last year.

Emma. · Post by **Emma.** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:17 am

Anonymous User wrote:My friend (not a TLS member) is sitting around a 175.5 (non-URM, no journal) looking at Chi & NY for corporate/transactional work. Which firms for him/her are "must-bids," and which firms should s/he make certain to bid high?

Your friend should NOT be counting on OCI to find a job. Basically his or her bids should be focused entirely on the least grade selective offices of Chi and NY (OCS can maybe help compile a list), but if your friend has ties to a smaller market they should be interviewing/mass mailing there like crazy, starting NOW.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:24 am

If the highest I'm willing to go with Cleary NY is 15, should I just scrap the firm from my bidlist?

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 11:56 am

If the highest I'm willing to go with Cleary NY is 15, should I just scrap the firm from my bidlist?

FWIW, I'm bidding them at #17, so I'd say no.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
If the highest I'm willing to go with Cleary NY is 15, should I just scrap the firm from my bidlist?
FWIW, I'm bidding them at #17, so I'd say no.

That's good to hear. Not that it doesn't seem like a great firm, it's just there are so many that I feel need to be placed higher that are more important to me. I began with it around 11 and it keeps slipping as I move other firms ahead.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:23 pm

Mad Hatter wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:My friend (not a TLS member) is sitting around a 175.5 (non-URM, no journal) looking at Chi & NY for corporate/transactional work. Which firms for him/her are "must-bids," and which firms should s/he make certain to bid high?
"Your friend" should definitely mass mail. Also, there are plenty if TLS "CCN Bottom 20%"-type threads they can look at for NY firms. As for Chicago, they'll want to look for the firms that have given callbacks to those with at or below 175.5, like Greenberg Traurig.

Chapman's worth a bid if you can tell a finance-ish story. Not grade selective, decently sized class (15ish I think), lots of T1 grads there and the uchicago grads there don't tend to have honors or journals listed. Probably very fit selective, though. Katten's probably worth a bid, as is maybe McDermott. You might want to consider skipping out on Chicago entirely, unless you have really strong ties -- you'll want to be able to properly seed the NY market, and hit the pavement for mass-mailing. Anywhere you might have ties.

Also, look out for the government programs. They tend to have September/August deadlines.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:If the highest I'm willing to go with Cleary NY is 15, should I just scrap the firm from my bidlist?

I had them at #24 a couple years ago and got them.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:07 pm

So how much can we trust OCS's advice on bidding? They ok'd my list but advised me to swap Bickel & Brewer with Gibson. 178-ish urm, no journal, interested in lit; any thoughts? I'd like to still get an interview with B&B.

1. Morrison & Foerster LLP (San Diego)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with NY, Palo Alto, and San Francisco offices)
2. Bryan Cave LLP (Santa Monica)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Atlanta, Chicago, Irvine, Kansas City, NY, Phoenix, St. Louis, San Francisco, and DC offices)
3. goodwin procter llp (LA)
a. 6 interview slots
4. Bickel & Brewer (Dallas)
a. 16 interview slots
5. paul hastings llp (LA)
a. 7 interview slots
6. Ahmad, Zavitsanos, &Anaipakos PC (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots
7. cooley llp (San Diego)
a. 38 interview slots (shared with Boston, Broomfield, LA, NY, Pal Alto, Reston, San Francisco, Seattle, and DC offices)
8. Vinson & Elkins LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Dallas, NY, and DC offices)
9. Jones Day (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Atlanta, Boston, Cleveland, Columbus, Dallas, Pittsburg, and DC offices)
10. Foley & Lardner LLP (San Diego)
a. 42 interview slots (shared with Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Jacksonville, LA, Madison, Miami, Milwaukee, NY, Orlando, Palo Alto, San Francisco, Tallahasee, Tampa, and DC offices)
11. Kirkland & Ellis LLP (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
12. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (Newport Beach)
a. 21 interview slots
13. Baker Botts LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin and Dallas offices)
14. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (LA)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, LA, NY, Palo Alto, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, and DC offices)
15. norton rose fulbright llp (Houston
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio offices)
16. Gibson Dunn & Cruthcer LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots (shared with Dallas, Denver, Orange County, Palo Alto, and San Francisco offices)
17. Irell & Manella LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots
18. Locke Lord Biddell & Liddell LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Chicago, and Dallas offices)
19. sidley austin llp (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
20. BakerHostetler (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Denver, Houston, LA, NY, Orlando, and DC offices)
21. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
22. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP (San Francisco)
a. 21 interview slots
23. Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View)
a. 21 interview slots
24. Baker Botts LLP (Dallas)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin and Houston offices)
25. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (San Francisco)
a. 21 interview slots
26. Munger, Tolles, & Olson LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots
27. Baker Botts LLP (Austin)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Dallas and Houston offices)

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:07 pm

Anonymous User wrote:So how much can we trust OCS's advice on bidding? They ok'd my list but advised me to swap Bickel & Brewer with Gibson. 178-ish urm, no journal, interested in lit; any thoughts? I'd like to still get an interview with B&B.

1. Morrison & Foerster LLP (San Diego)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with NY, Palo Alto, and San Francisco offices)
2. Bryan Cave LLP (Santa Monica)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Atlanta, Chicago, Irvine, Kansas City, NY, Phoenix, St. Louis, San Francisco, and DC offices)
3. Goodwin Procter LLP (LA)
a. 6 interview slots
4. Bickel & Brewer (Dallas)
a. 16 interview slots
5. Paul Hastings LLP (LA)
a. 7 interview slots
6. Ahmad, Zavitsanos, &Anaipakos PC (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots
7. Cooley LLP (San Diego)
a. 38 interview slots (shared with Boston, Broomfield, LA, NY, Pal Alto, Reston, San Francisco, Seattle, and DC offices)
8. Vinson & Elkins LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Dallas, NY, and DC offices)
9. Jones Day (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Atlanta, Boston, Cleveland, Columbus, Dallas, Pittsburg, and DC offices)
10. Foley & Lardner LLP (San Diego)
a. 42 interview slots (shared with Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Jacksonville, LA, Madison, Miami, Milwaukee, NY, Orlando, Palo Alto, San Francisco, Tallahasee, Tampa, and DC offices)
11. Kirkland & Ellis LLP (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
12. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (Newport Beach)
a. 21 interview slots
13. Baker Botts LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin and Dallas offices)
14. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (LA)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, LA, NY, Palo Alto, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, and DC offices)
15. Norton Rose Fulbright LLP (Houston
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio offices)
16. Gibson Dunn & Cruthcer LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots (shared with Dallas, Denver, Orange County, Palo Alto, and San Francisco offices)
17. Irell & Manella LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots
18. Locke Lord Biddell & Liddell LLP (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin, Chicago, and Dallas offices)
19. Sidley Austin LLP (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
20. BakerHostetler (Houston)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Denver, Houston, LA, NY, Orlando, and DC offices)
21. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (LA)
a. 21 interview slots
22. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP (San Francisco)
a. 21 interview slots
23. Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View)
a. 21 interview slots
24. Baker Botts LLP (Dallas)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Austin and Houston offices)
25. O’Melveny & Myers LLP (San Francisco)
a. 21 interview slots
26. Munger, Tolles, & Olson LLP (LA)
a. 42 interview slots
27. Baker Botts LLP (Austin)
a. 21 interview slots (shared with Dallas and Houston offices)

where do you have ties?

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:01 pm

Anonymous User wrote:

where do you have ties?

Texas

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:26 am

Has anyone had any success from mailing so far?

Any Quinn callbacks?

Also, I liked the name idea.

-Greenleaf

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:32 am

I had a Quinn callback a couple weeks ago, radio silence since.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:32 am

Anonymous User wrote:Has anyone had any success from mailing so far?

Any Quinn callbacks?

Also, I liked the name idea.

-Greenleaf

I know of at least one UChi Quinn callback, NY I think.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 9:36 am

Thank you for the responses!

Post grades if you can, word is they are being picky.

-Greenleaf

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:32 am

Anonymous User wrote:Has anyone had any success from mailing so far?

Any Quinn callbacks?

Also, I liked the name idea.

-Greenleaf

Got three screeners and one callback from contacting NYC V50's who aren't coming to OCI.

UChicago OCI 2013 Forum

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Register for access!

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Register now!

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Register now, it's still FREE!

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Re: UChicago OCI 2013

Seriously? What are you waiting for?