theanswer wrote:How viable of an option do you think it would be for someone who graduates from LS without a job to do post-bacc EE/CS in the hopes of landing something at a firm?
I've never seen this done, so I can't say for sure. My intuition is it's not very promising. For one, you want to convey that you are committed to being a lawyer, which is tough to do when you spend the first several years after graduation not practicing law and instead getting a cs/ee bachelors. Additionally, it just looks really desperate and firms tend not to like people who look desperate.
If it's an option, it might work better to try to get the cs/ee degree while in law school before getting the JD. Maybe your school can let you take a year off after your second year of LS to do that? I'm not sure of the logistics. But being able to say "I got this cs degree while in law school" looks a lot better than "I graduated law school, couldn't find a job, and then went back to school to get this cs degree."
Don't want to hijack, but as to this particular question, I've run across a couple folks who have gone the post-bacc, post-LS EE/CS degree and gotten into patent prosecution. I don't know them well enough to know their stories, but they are universally at smallish boutiques (under 50 attorneys/agents) like mine.
As someone involved in hiring at my boutique, I can say that we wouldn't look askance at someone who took this route solely because it's an unconventional path. For many of us, me included, law is a second career--that is, we did not take the most direct possible path. That said, for most of us in that boat, our prior experience is at least relevant to our current practice, which isn't going to be the case for the post-LS EE/CS candidate.
I disagree with mbison that getting a post-LS technical degree necessarily
demonstrates lack of commitment to law or smacks of desperation. (Not saying some firms wouldn't see it that way, just that not all would, and the burden is on the candidate to find the right fit.)
EE/CS bachelor's degrees don't come easy at any point in one's educational career. So long as they got good grades (i.e., would be competitive regardless of the timing of the degree) I would tend to view someone who did the technical degree late as demonstrating above-average
commitment to being a patent attorney. By contrast, when candidates go straight from technical UG to LS, I always wonder whether it's because they truly wanted to get into patent, or because they discovered they didn't want to or couldn't get a technical job and law was a convenient backup. (Not that it makes a huge difference, but I suppose it could tip the scales on a marginal candidate.)