Desmarais?

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 310074
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Desmarais?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:30 am

Anonymous User wrote:Are exit opportunities a concern given Desmarais' reputation regarding their involvement with NPEs?


I don't see why an arguably distasteful firm client would cause problems for exit options so long as the experience is up to par (complex lit, early responsibilities, early trial experience). Latham represented Church of Scientology and I doubt that hurts their exit option prospects.

I'm curious about long-term staying potential. If you don't want to exit, will you be forced out of the firm after 3-4 years? Is it as likely as it is at other biglaw?

User avatar
rpupkin

Platinum
Posts: 5658
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Desmarais?

Postby rpupkin » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:51 am

Anonymous User wrote:Are exit opportunities a concern given Desmarais' reputation regarding their involvement with NPEs?

Yes. If you go to a plaintiff-side patent boutique, you'll be limited in two ways: (1) most defense-oriented patent lit groups (which is basically all of big law) won't hire you as a lateral, and (2) in-house opportunities—particularly at SV tech companies—will be significantly diminished.

I've got nothing against Desmarais, but I wouldn't start there as a litigator unless I was committed to doing plaintiff-side patent work for the rest my career. It's safer to start in big law or a defense-oriented boutique. If you're good, Desmarais will still be happy to consider you later. (In general, it's easier to go patent-defense-side-to-patent- plaintiff-side than the other way around.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 310074
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Desmarais?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2016 8:06 am

how were CBs for those with offers? highly technical grilling?

Anonymous User
Posts: 310074
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Desmarais?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:52 am

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Are exit opportunities a concern given Desmarais' reputation regarding their involvement with NPEs?

Yes. If you go to a plaintiff-side patent boutique, you'll be limited in two ways: (1) most defense-oriented patent lit groups (which is basically all of big law) won't hire you as a lateral, and (2) in-house opportunities—particularly at SV tech companies—will be significantly diminished.

I've got nothing against Desmarais, but I wouldn't start there as a litigator unless I was committed to doing plaintiff-side patent work for the rest my career. It's safer to start in big law or a defense-oriented boutique. If you're good, Desmarais will still be happy to consider you later. (In general, it's easier to go patent-defense-side-to-patent- plaintiff-side than the other way around.)


Aren't in-house opportunities more or less dictated by who your firm's client's are? Desmarais does defense work for Cisco, Apple, IBM, and a few other pharma major companies (I'm sure there are smaller companies too), so wouldn't it be possible to go in-house there? Given the small firm size, you'd also have more contact and access to the client/ability to network, no? I was also under the impression that big firms are more than willing to hire a competent litigator that went up against them. I could be wrong about all of this; I am just a law student.

eta- Unless the callback interviewer were lying to me, they said they would field as many recruiter calls as when they were at big firms (mostly K&E).

Re: callback structure, no, the most technical it gets is them asking you to explain your senior thesis to them as if they were a judge/jury. They're more worried about your abilities as a litigator than your ability to understand the subject material.

User avatar
rpupkin

Platinum
Posts: 5658
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Desmarais?

Postby rpupkin » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Aren't in-house opportunities more or less dictated by who your firm's client's are? Desmarais does defense work for Cisco, Apple, IBM, and a few other pharma major companies (I'm sure there are smaller companies too), so wouldn't it be possible to go in-house there? Given the small firm size, you'd also have more contact and access to the client/ability to network, no? I was also under the impression that big firms are more than willing to hire a competent litigator that went up against them. I could be wrong about all of this; I am just a law student.

You're right on all counts. Because Desmarais does some defense-side work, it's not as career-limiting as, say, McKool Smith. And the client contact thing is important. But Desmarais's plaintiff-side troll work will shut you out of most in-house lit gigs. Not all, but most.



Return to “Legal Employment?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.