Top Law Schools

For firms asking for law school transcripts, are they wanting unofficial or official?

SplitMyPants wrote:For firms asking for law school transcripts, are they wanting unofficial or official?

unofficial

Wow, 10 preselects and 4 alts. Do firms come down hard on you if your GPA dropped a bit since your application?

Went through PLIP during 2L and 3L and accepted an offer from one of the PLIP firms. Happy to answer any question in PM since I do not really check the forum often to read through threads due to prepping for the bar.

Thanks Kyle010723 for offering to answer questions.

Can you give us an idea of your background i.e. what was your undergrad major / where did your law school and GPA fall / were you focused on lit or pros? How many preselects did you have and how many callbacks did they turn into? What locations were you focused on? What was the turnaround time between PLIP to your callbacks and offers?

Any other general advice you have on what you wish you had known or led to your successful outcomes would be great to hear as well. Thanks!

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks Kyle010723 for offering to answer questions.

Can you give us an idea of your background i.e. what was your undergrad major / where did your law school and GPA fall / were you focused on lit or pros? How many preselects did you have and how many callbacks did they turn into? What locations were you focused on? What was the turnaround time between PLIP to your callbacks and offers?

Any other general advice you have on what you wish you had known or led to your successful outcomes would be great to hear as well. Thanks!

PM me if you want to know stats. I'm EE and focused on prosecution.

One general advice regarding OCI not limited to PLIP is bid on ALL of the one you qualified for, not just the city you think you want to practice in. You can always turn down more offers if you come to that, but you don't want to limit your chances to land an offer. But I suppose it is too late for PLIP at this point.

I also attended PLIP as a 2L, got an offer from a PLIP firm, summered, and now I am working at that firm as a junior associate in IP. I have a chemical background and went to a mid-tier law school. I was patent bar eligible when I interviewed but not yet registered to practice before the PTO, though was studying. If you want to know anything more specific about my stats, please PM me. Otherwise, happy to answer questions especially with the interviews coming up next month!

did 2L plip; accepted a PLIP offer; am doing summer right now. Ask away.

lhanvt13 wrote:did 2L plip; accepted a PLIP offer; am doing summer right now. Ask away.

What would you say is the biggest difference between any other interview and an interview at Loyola?


I want to wind up doing litigation but got interviews for lots of pros firms as well as lit firms. Should I be up front with the pros firms that I want to do lit? I certainly haven't closed the door on pros, but right now im leaning pretty heavily towards lit.

If I'm interviewing at a firm that does both should I mention my preference for lit?

How much of these interviews is about fit? Am I just talking myself up or trying to be as personable as possible?

Tiberius42 wrote: What would you say is the biggest difference between any other interview and an interview at Loyola?

I want to wind up doing litigation but got interviews for lots of pros firms as well as lit firms. Should I be up front with the pros firms that I want to do lit? I certainly haven't closed the door on pros, but right now im leaning pretty heavily towards lit.

If I'm interviewing at a firm that does both should I mention my preference for lit?

How much of these interviews is about fit? Am I just talking myself up or trying to be as personable as possible?

Biggest difference between OCI and PLIP is they actually want to interview you at PLIP. This is especially true if your own school is a mix of pre-select + lottery or pure lottery.

If you know you absolutely positively want to do litigation ONLY. Definitely be up front about it. Otherwise phrase it as you are interested in Litigation, but you are open to pro and lit, and tell them you've heard a proc experience actually help with transitioning to lit down the road, which serves as a good lead-in to ask them the question (do you think prosecution is a good foundational experience to have, etc).

Most general practice firms and larger boutiques are happy to rotate you between pro and lit and let you test the water to see which one you like better.

I would be cautious that most of the firms are there looking for proc, if you tell them straight up that in no way would you do proc, you would be foreclosing a lot of doors.

Finally, PLIP is not your typical screener like OCI, they picked you because they've seen your credentials and think you are qualified. Personally, I think it is important to make the interviewer like you and be memorable. Remember, they only have five minutes or even less to jog down their notes before the next interview, you want to let them remember something about you, and not just you went to this law school and got this grade.

Tiberius42 wrote:

lhanvt13 wrote:did 2L plip; accepted a PLIP offer; am doing summer right now. Ask away.

What would you say is the biggest difference between any other interview and an interview at Loyola?

I want to wind up doing litigation but got interviews for lots of pros firms as well as lit firms. Should I be up front with the pros firms that I want to do lit? I certainly haven't closed the door on pros, but right now im leaning pretty heavily towards lit.

If I'm interviewing at a firm that does both should I mention my preference for lit?

If you are interviewing for a pros shop, you want to do pros only b/c you like working with inventors/getting to see cutting edge tech. If you are interviewing for a lit group, you know how important to the economy and country it is that you protect the rights of inventors/ you are a competitive person, etc. If you are interviewing for a group that does both, you say both of these things and how you appreciate that one informs the other.

I debated for 8 years in high school and college and then coached a team before law school. Should I harp on this on why I want to do lit? I have to imagine a hardcore debate background is rarer in IP than other types of law.

Tiberius42 wrote:I debated for 8 years in high school and college and then coached a team before law school. Should I harp on this on why I want to do lit? I have to imagine a hardcore debate background is rarer in IP than other types of law.

Dunno. Kind of sounds gooberish, and I don't think Cicero would be happy maeking claim charts.

Tiberius42 wrote:

lhanvt13 wrote:did 2L plip; accepted a PLIP offer; am doing summer right now. Ask away.

What would you say is the biggest difference between any other interview and an interview at Loyola?


I want to wind up doing litigation but got interviews for lots of pros firms as well as lit firms. Should I be up front with the pros firms that I want to do lit? I certainly haven't closed the door on pros, but right now im leaning pretty heavily towards lit.

If I'm interviewing at a firm that does both should I mention my preference for lit?

How much of these interviews is about fit? Am I just talking myself up or trying to be as personable as possible?

I would do this: Tell pros-only firms that you want prosecution and that's your lifelong answer to "what do you wanna be when you grow up." Then tell mix and lit-heavy firms that you're looking for lit. That way you'll be able to play both sides until you have to ultimately decide whether you want lit or pros.

Most of these interviews are about fit. As long as you can back up your resume to some extent, and for pros firms you can back up your GPA or whatever undergrad achievement in your STEM field, the rest comes down to "do I wanna work with him/her. at least that's my take on law school interviews. My goal for every interview was to make the interviewer laugh or at least get them to have fun during the interview. I feel like that makes a better lasting impression. Ended up with a decent amount of offers from PLIP so I'm guessing it worked to some extent..

OCI vs. PLIP: at my school, everything is lottery. They don't expect you to be IP lit and a lot of interviewers are clueless about their IP Lit needs or their IP Lit department structure. As a result, some interviewers get a bit startled and I even had an interview where I had to do a second screener over the phone with an IP lit counsel. If I could do it again, I would just interview with firms that have an IP Lit department who also happens to have a rotating summer program, then tell them I want corporate transactional, and then at the end of the summer just tell them I want to be in the IP Lit group.

Anonymous User wrote:

Tiberius42 wrote:I debated for 8 years in high school and college and then coached a team before law school. Should I harp on this on why I want to do lit? I have to imagine a hardcore debate background is rarer in IP than other types of law.

Dunno. Kind of sounds gooberish, and I don't think Cicero would be happy maeking claim charts.

claim charts is love, claim charts is life.

Tiberius42 wrote:I debated for 8 years in high school and college and then coached a team before law school. Should I harp on this on why I want to do lit? I have to imagine a hardcore debate background is rarer in IP than other types of law.

If I interviewed someone and they brought up anything in high school, I would just wonder the whole time why they're talking about high school. The coaching part is fine because it demonstrates leadership and I'm assuming it was not in high school. I don't think you need to harp on why you want to do litigation - just be able to discuss why you have an interest in it.

faintbeam wrote: If I interviewed someone and they brought up anything in high school, I would just wonder the whole time why they're talking about high school. The coaching part is fine because it demonstrates leadership and I'm assuming it was not in high school. I don't think you need to harp on why you want to do litigation - just be able to discuss why you have an interest in it.

Ya, I wouldn't really talk about high school. I was pretty highly ranked my senior year of undergrad and then coached a college team for a while. I was thinking i'd talk about being a competition junkie and having experience with research and argumentation. I know people don't want to hear anything about pre-law school stuff giving you research experience because of some presumption that the law is this impenetrable black box that nobody but actual lawyers could develop skills for, but i think if i talked about it in the context of having an affinity for litigation, it could be good.

EE here. I didn't see any pros-only shops--or at least no one indicated they were hiring only for pros. In fact many were hiring only for lit. And when I look at most of the GPs online they mostly have both and sometimes a tech trans group as well.

SplitMyPants wrote:EE here. I didn't see any pros-only shops--or at least no one indicated they were hiring only for pros. In fact many were hiring only for lit. And when I look at most of the GPs online they mostly have both and sometimes a tech trans group as well.

In general, if they require a specific technical degree, they are looking for pros.

Tiberius42 wrote:

faintbeam wrote: If I interviewed someone and they brought up anything in high school, I would just wonder the whole time why they're talking about high school. The coaching part is fine because it demonstrates leadership and I'm assuming it was not in high school. I don't think you need to harp on why you want to do litigation - just be able to discuss why you have an interest in it.

Ya, I wouldn't really talk about high school. I was pretty highly ranked my senior year of undergrad and then coached a college team for a while. I was thinking i'd talk about being a competition junkie and having experience with research and argumentation. I know people don't want to hear anything about pre-law school stuff giving you research experience because of some presumption that the law is this impenetrable black box that nobody but actual lawyers could develop skills for, but i think if i talked about it in the context of having an affinity for litigation, it could be good.

Be careful doing this. Successful debaters are everywhere in law, so that won't score you many points, and might come off as gooberish (as someone else said). If it comes up when answering a question ("why lit?") then cool.

Anonymous User wrote:Can anyone speak to how the QE screener operates since they primarily go directly to cb?

When I did it two year ago, I think it was the first year they were doing the parties instead of OCI. The screener at PLIP was just like any other screener though. They only had one room for all of their offices though, so be prepared to justify what office you want and then you will probably spend most of your time talking to someone from that office. There were like 5-6 people in the room tho which was a bit different from most others. Overall I thought it was one of my more pleasant screeners and ended up with an offer.

fobstory.jpeg

Any advice on interviewing with Skadden NYC Patent Litigation anyone?

T1 - Top 4%
BS - non-EE/CS/Biochem engineering
5 years WE

Loyola (Initially):
15 pre-select
5 alternates

I was alternate 10, and I am now scheduled. There seems to be some movement tonight in order to finalize for tomorrow.

--

SFIPLA:
8 pre-select

No overlap between SFIPLA & Loyola. Seems like the firms did their homework.

Top 30 law school in midwest
GPA: 3.79 (Top 10%)
UG biochem from Umich with publications and significant research experience
UG GPA: 3.65

16 pre-selects
3 alternates

How should I approach PLIP if when I applied my GPA was a 3.5? Should I go to the hospitality suites and try to get more interviews or drop off my updated resume?