Chicago OCI 2017

(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: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:35 pm

So I guess the K&E cutoff was high this year. It's usually between 180.5 and 181, right?

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:37 pm

Must have been- I have a 180.85 and didn't get it

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:36 am

Do we know if K&E has been emailed out? I got a 181.125 but I haven't heard anything either. That would be a pretty high cutoff but it's definitely possible.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:45 am

Anonymous User wrote:Do we know if K&E has been emailed out? I got a 181.125 but I haven't heard anything either. That would be a pretty high cutoff but it's definitely possible.

Can confirm that K&E email has gone out.

User avatar
Sacred Cow
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:53 pm

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Sacred Cow » Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:58 am

Anonymous User wrote:This thread has been so quiet! So I'll try to get it active again by posting my bidlist. I don't know what I'm doing so any advice is appreciated.

Grades: 180.5+, no K&E, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, relatively unrelated
Preferred Market: Chicago > NY, some ties to Boston
Practice Area: Litigation
Misc: My resume is pretty public interest heavy, so might have a lower screener-->callback ratio
Bid list:

1. Ropes & Gray (Chi) (21)
2. Jenner & Block (Chi) (63)
3. Kirkland & Ellis (Chi) (84)
4. Sidley (Chi) (84)
5. Skadden (Chi) (84)
6. Latham & Watkins (Chi) (52)
7. Paul Weiss (NY) (21)
8. Mayer & Brown (Chi) (24)
9. Jones Day (Chi) (42)
10. Fried Frank (Chi) (42)
11. Paul Hastings (Chi) (21)
12. O’Melveny (NY) (21)
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) (42)
14. Cravath (NY) (42)
15. Debevoise (NY) (63)
16. Proskauer (NY) (21) *
17. Williams & Connolly (42)
18. WilmerHale (Bos) (10)
19. Barack Ferrazzano (Chi) (42)
20. Winston & Strawn (Chi) (42)
21. McDermott (Chi) (63)
22. Eimer Stahl (Chi) (21)
23. Wachtell (NY) (42)
24. Boies (NY) (21) *
25. Goodwin (Bos) (21)

* I know I will not get a screener but wanted to include to be able to follow up and try to get on the schedule

Pre-OCI interviews at: Simpson Thacher, Davis Polk, Morrison Foerster, Gibson Dunn, and Cleary


Your list seems a little backwards. 2-6 you can bid waayyyy lower and still get screeners. I bid Kirkland somewhere around 40-50 last year and still got it. Instead of conceding that you won't get screeners with other firms (Proskauer, Boies, Wachtell, etc.), just bid them higher. Even if you don't get a screener, it's pretty easy to schedule an interview with those firms outside of OCI if you don't get them, especially with your grades.
Last edited by Sacred Cow on Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:00 pm

Grades: 180.1, no LR or journal
URM/Female: URM
Preferred Market: CA, SF>PA=LA, strong ties to Northern California,
Practice Area: Interested in securities litigation/enforcement/regulatory work, also financial services-related transactional work to some extent.
Work Exp: Strong corporate experience

Callback scheduled with STB Palo Alto

1. Covington SF 10
2. Gibson Dunn SF 42
3. Kirkland and Ellis SF 21
4. Morrison and Foerster SF 21
5. Latham and Watkins LA 21
6. Mayer Brown LA 10
7. Paul Hastings LA 9
8. Jones Day SF 21
9. Wilson Sonsini Palo Alto 21
10. Fenwick and West Mountain View 21
11. Cooley SF 42
12. Irell LA 21
13. O'Melveny & Myers LA 21
14. Sidley Austin LA 21
15. Orrick SF 21
16. Davis Polk Menlo Park 21
17. Munger, Tolles & Olson LA 21
18. Ropes and Gray SF 42
19. Pillsbury SF 21
20. Proskauer Rose LA 21
21. Skadden LA 21
22. Perkins Coie SF 21
23. Kirkland and Ellis LA 21

Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Do we know if K&E has been emailed out? I got a 181.125 but I haven't heard anything either. That would be a pretty high cutoff but it's definitely possible.


:shock:

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 15, 2017 10:32 pm

It seems like last year was an up-year for DC based on the bidding reports, and based on my conversations with people I think this year might be as well. Anyone else have any sense of that?

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 19, 2017 12:06 pm

Grades: 178.5 or so, law review
URM/Female: N/A
Work Exp: Some
Preferred Market: Chicago > DC
Practice Area: Litigation
Misc: Already have an offer, although it is not in a preferred market.

Bid List:
1. Latham & Watkins – Chicago (52)
2. Kirkland & Ellis LLP – Chicago (84)
3. Jones Day – Chicago (42)
4. Jenner & Block LLP – Chicago (63)
5. Sidley Austin LLP – Chicago (84)
6. Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP – Chicago (84)
7. Ropes & Gray – Chicago (21)
8. Mayer Brown LLP – Chicago (24 – litigation)
9. McGuire Woods LLP – Chicago (21)
10. Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP – D.C. (65)
11. Miller Shakman & Beem – Chicago (21)
12. Eimer Stahl LLP - Chicago (21)
13. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton – D.C. (42)
14. Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP – Chicago (42)

This bid list is still rough, so I very much appreciate any/all feedback

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 19, 2017 4:08 pm

Here's my rough bidlist, not sure what I'm doing but read through past threads. I'm only bidding NYC so all offices are the NYC offices. Thanks for your help! Also if there are any additional firms it would make sense to throw in at the bottom please let me know.

Grades: 178, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, law related in NYC.
Preferred Market: NYC
Practice Area: Leaning transactional but open to litigation
Misc: My resume skews really writing heavy so I'm worried firms will question my interest in transactional. I did the transactional challenge to try to help with this.
Bid list:
1. Shearman Sterling NYC
2. White and Case NYC
3. Ropes and Gray NYC
4. Latham NYC
5. Kirkland NYC
6. Proskauer NYC
7. Sidley NYC
8. Fried Frank NYC
9. Paul Weiss NYC
10. WilmerHale NYC*
11. Milbank NYC*
12. Simpson Thatcher NYC
13. Sullivan and Cromwell NYC
14. Skadden NYC
15. Davis Polk NYC
16. Debevoise NYC
17. Cooley NYC*
18. Cravath NYC
19. Morrison and Foerster NYC*
20. Allen & Overy NYC
21. Cadwalder NYC
22. Weil NYC*
23. Cleary NYC
24. Gibson Dunn NYC
25. Jones Day NYC

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 19, 2017 4:21 pm

Sacred Cow wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:This thread has been so quiet! So I'll try to get it active again by posting my bidlist. I don't know what I'm doing so any advice is appreciated.

Grades: 180.5+, no K&E, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, relatively unrelated
Preferred Market: Chicago > NY, some ties to Boston
Practice Area: Litigation
Misc: My resume is pretty public interest heavy, so might have a lower screener-->callback ratio
Bid list:

1. Ropes & Gray (Chi) (21)
2. Jenner & Block (Chi) (63)
3. Kirkland & Ellis (Chi) (84)
4. Sidley (Chi) (84)
5. Skadden (Chi) (84)
6. Latham & Watkins (Chi) (52)
7. Paul Weiss (NY) (21)
8. Mayer & Brown (Chi) (24)
9. Jones Day (Chi) (42)
10. Fried Frank (Chi) (42)
11. Paul Hastings (Chi) (21)
12. O’Melveny (NY) (21)
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) (42)
14. Cravath (NY) (42)
15. Debevoise (NY) (63)
16. Proskauer (NY) (21) *
17. Williams & Connolly (42)
18. WilmerHale (Bos) (10)
19. Barack Ferrazzano (Chi) (42)
20. Winston & Strawn (Chi) (42)
21. McDermott (Chi) (63)
22. Eimer Stahl (Chi) (21)
23. Wachtell (NY) (42)
24. Boies (NY) (21) *
25. Goodwin (Bos) (21)

* I know I will not get a screener but wanted to include to be able to follow up and try to get on the schedule

Pre-OCI interviews at: Simpson Thacher, Davis Polk, Morrison Foerster, Gibson Dunn, and Cleary


Your list seems a little backwards. 2-6 you can bid waayyyy lower and still get screeners. I bid Kirkland somewhere around 40-50 last year and still got it. Instead of conceding that you won't get screeners with other firms (Proskauer, Boies, Wachtell, etc.), just bid them higher. Even if you don't get a screener, it's pretty easy to schedule an interview with those firms outside of OCI if you don't get them, especially with your grades.


I'm not sure if this will necessarily be the case. I think last year was a particularly down year for Chicago, and it is often necessary to bid the big Chicago firms in the top 10 to secure an interview.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:39 pm

Hey all:
I am a transfer student. I just had a quick question regarding the school's gpa policy... the career center told me not to include my gpa on my resume because students do not get their gpa from uChicago until the end of their career. In that case, why are all of you posting your gpas on here? Also, do you include that GPA on your resume?

User avatar
chicago-gunner123
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:27 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby chicago-gunner123 » Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:53 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hey all:
I am a transfer student. I just had a quick question regarding the school's gpa policy... the career center told me not to include my gpa on my resume because students do not get their gpa from uChicago until the end of their career. In that case, why are all of you posting your gpas on here? Also, do you include that GPA on your resume?


This is because OCS has a strange policy where they do not want you to calculate your GPA. For that reason, do not put it on your resume

With that said, nearly every single firm will ask you for your transcript to see your grades and will calculate your GPA. Most firms care about grades and will consider them when making a decision on whether to give you a CB, which is why people are posting their grades. When mass mailing firms you should send them your resume and a transcript

User avatar
Sacred Cow
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 1:53 pm

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Sacred Cow » Fri Jul 21, 2017 5:05 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Sacred Cow wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:This thread has been so quiet! So I'll try to get it active again by posting my bidlist. I don't know what I'm doing so any advice is appreciated.

Grades: 180.5+, no K&E, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, relatively unrelated
Preferred Market: Chicago > NY, some ties to Boston
Practice Area: Litigation
Misc: My resume is pretty public interest heavy, so might have a lower screener-->callback ratio
Bid list:

1. Ropes & Gray (Chi) (21)
2. Jenner & Block (Chi) (63)
3. Kirkland & Ellis (Chi) (84)
4. Sidley (Chi) (84)
5. Skadden (Chi) (84)
6. Latham & Watkins (Chi) (52)
7. Paul Weiss (NY) (21)
8. Mayer & Brown (Chi) (24)
9. Jones Day (Chi) (42)
10. Fried Frank (Chi) (42)
11. Paul Hastings (Chi) (21)
12. O’Melveny (NY) (21)
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) (42)
14. Cravath (NY) (42)
15. Debevoise (NY) (63)
16. Proskauer (NY) (21) *
17. Williams & Connolly (42)
18. WilmerHale (Bos) (10)
19. Barack Ferrazzano (Chi) (42)
20. Winston & Strawn (Chi) (42)
21. McDermott (Chi) (63)
22. Eimer Stahl (Chi) (21)
23. Wachtell (NY) (42)
24. Boies (NY) (21) *
25. Goodwin (Bos) (21)

* I know I will not get a screener but wanted to include to be able to follow up and try to get on the schedule

Pre-OCI interviews at: Simpson Thacher, Davis Polk, Morrison Foerster, Gibson Dunn, and Cleary


Your list seems a little backwards. 2-6 you can bid waayyyy lower and still get screeners. I bid Kirkland somewhere around 40-50 last year and still got it. Instead of conceding that you won't get screeners with other firms (Proskauer, Boies, Wachtell, etc.), just bid them higher. Even if you don't get a screener, it's pretty easy to schedule an interview with those firms outside of OCI if you don't get them, especially with your grades.


I'm not sure if this will necessarily be the case. I think last year was a particularly down year for Chicago, and it is often necessary to bid the big Chicago firms in the top 10 to secure an interview.


I mean, obviously bidding them lower increases the risk you won't get an OCI screener. But you don't need an OCI screener at these at firms, just email them. You're already in the city and they need to hire a lot of people. With good grades at U of C, I'm sure they'd be happy to set up an interview outside of OCI. It's harder to do that with the firms she bid lower.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 5114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby skers » Fri Jul 21, 2017 9:02 pm

Alum here who can talk about corp work, particularly Chi market. Happy to help, but may be delayed in response. Or not at all if you're too needy.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5940
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby 2014 » Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:37 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Here's my rough bidlist, not sure what I'm doing but read through past threads. I'm only bidding NYC so all offices are the NYC offices. Thanks for your help! Also if there are any additional firms it would make sense to throw in at the bottom please let me know.

Grades: 178, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, law related in NYC.
Preferred Market: NYC
Practice Area: Leaning transactional but open to litigation
Misc: My resume skews really writing heavy so I'm worried firms will question my interest in transactional. I did the transactional challenge to try to help with this.
Bid list:
1. Shearman Sterling NYC
2. White and Case NYC
3. Ropes and Gray NYC
4. Latham NYC
5. Kirkland NYC
6. Proskauer NYC
7. Sidley NYC
8. Fried Frank NYC
9. Paul Weiss NYC
10. WilmerHale NYC*
11. Milbank NYC*
12. Simpson Thatcher NYC
13. Sullivan and Cromwell NYC
14. Skadden NYC
15. Davis Polk NYC
16. Debevoise NYC
17. Cooley NYC*
18. Cravath NYC
19. Morrison and Foerster NYC*
20. Allen & Overy NYC
21. Cadwalder NYC
22. Weil NYC*
23. Cleary NYC
24. Gibson Dunn NYC
25. Jones Day NYC

You are going to start missing out on some firms at or after Simpson and those are not firms you want to miss. I'd consider making room for 2 or 3 more of the huge class firms (e.g. Simpson, Skadden, Cravath, S&C, Davis Polk, Cleary and maybe Deb) in your top 10 because they call back and hire more people than a Ropes or a Sidley or whatever.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:46 am

Sacred Cow wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Sacred Cow wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:This thread has been so quiet! So I'll try to get it active again by posting my bidlist. I don't know what I'm doing so any advice is appreciated.

Grades: 180.5+, no K&E, no journal
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: Some, relatively unrelated
Preferred Market: Chicago > NY, some ties to Boston
Practice Area: Litigation
Misc: My resume is pretty public interest heavy, so might have a lower screener-->callback ratio
Bid list:

1. Ropes & Gray (Chi) (21)
2. Jenner & Block (Chi) (63)
3. Kirkland & Ellis (Chi) (84)
4. Sidley (Chi) (84)
5. Skadden (Chi) (84)
6. Latham & Watkins (Chi) (52)
7. Paul Weiss (NY) (21)
8. Mayer & Brown (Chi) (24)
9. Jones Day (Chi) (42)
10. Fried Frank (Chi) (42)
11. Paul Hastings (Chi) (21)
12. O’Melveny (NY) (21)
13. Sullivan & Cromwell (NY) (42)
14. Cravath (NY) (42)
15. Debevoise (NY) (63)
16. Proskauer (NY) (21) *
17. Williams & Connolly (42)
18. WilmerHale (Bos) (10)
19. Barack Ferrazzano (Chi) (42)
20. Winston & Strawn (Chi) (42)
21. McDermott (Chi) (63)
22. Eimer Stahl (Chi) (21)
23. Wachtell (NY) (42)
24. Boies (NY) (21) *
25. Goodwin (Bos) (21)

* I know I will not get a screener but wanted to include to be able to follow up and try to get on the schedule

Pre-OCI interviews at: Simpson Thacher, Davis Polk, Morrison Foerster, Gibson Dunn, and Cleary


Your list seems a little backwards. 2-6 you can bid waayyyy lower and still get screeners. I bid Kirkland somewhere around 40-50 last year and still got it. Instead of conceding that you won't get screeners with other firms (Proskauer, Boies, Wachtell, etc.), just bid them higher. Even if you don't get a screener, it's pretty easy to schedule an interview with those firms outside of OCI if you don't get them, especially with your grades.


I'm not sure if this will necessarily be the case. I think last year was a particularly down year for Chicago, and it is often necessary to bid the big Chicago firms in the top 10 to secure an interview.


I mean, obviously bidding them lower increases the risk you won't get an OCI screener. But you don't need an OCI screener at these at firms, just email them. You're already in the city and they need to hire a lot of people. With good grades at U of C, I'm sure they'd be happy to set up an interview outside of OCI. It's harder to do that with the firms she bid lower.


Interesting. Does anyone else have experience reaching out to Chicago firms to set up interviews outside (after) OCI? I was thinking about bidding them lower with this in mind but was concerned that they might infer from the fact that I bid them too low that they weren't a top choice.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 5114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby skers » Sat Jul 22, 2017 11:59 am

Reaching out to set up additional interviews should be a supplemental strategy and not something that you're trying to use to get additional bites at the apple. Good chance your email never gets read or just deleted.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 22, 2017 1:03 pm

skers wrote:Reaching out to set up additional interviews should be a supplemental strategy and not something that you're trying to use to get additional bites at the apple. Good chance your email never gets read or just deleted.


Got it. Also, do some employers only deal with emailed applications closer to or after OCI? There is only one firm that I'm very interested in that is not going to be at OCI. I should be very competitive for them based on grades but haven't heard back.

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5940
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby 2014 » Sat Jul 22, 2017 1:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
skers wrote:Reaching out to set up additional interviews should be a supplemental strategy and not something that you're trying to use to get additional bites at the apple. Good chance your email never gets read or just deleted.


Got it. Also, do some employers only deal with emailed applications closer to or after OCI? There is only one firm that I'm very interested in that is not going to be at OCI. I should be very competitive for them based on grades but haven't heard back.

Wildly firm dependent - firms with bigger classes and more bodies in recruiting generally deal with applications on a rolling basis while those with small classes will often wait until they have substantially all of their applications in and make decisions about who to CB/offer then. Others will do the CBs on a rolling basis but will only initially extend offers to a few of their most prized candidates and sit on the rest until they've called back everyone they plan to.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 5114
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby skers » Sat Jul 22, 2017 6:08 pm

Yeah, totally depends. Recruiters are insanely busy right now and they have no reason to get back to you since they can fill their class w/ easier avenues. Maybe you'll hear back, maybe you won't. Don't bank on it.

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:26 pm

Hi all! I'd appreciate any suggestions for rounding out my bid list because it's a little on the short side. I have ties to both SV and SoCal, and a couple CA-based firms are noticeably absent from my bidlist because I have pre-OCI CBs (SoCal market). I chose SF firms only where no SV option and/or corp group located in SF.

Grades: 178-78.5
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: 3+ yrs paralegal
Preferred Market: SV/SF >>>>>>> NY
Practice Area: Corp
Misc: Secondary Journal

Bid list:
1. Shearman NY (21)
2. White & Case NY (21)
3. Proskauer NY
4. Sidley NY (21)
5. Cooley SD (42*)
6. Cooley PA (42*)
7. Milbank NY (21)
8. Fried Frank NY (21)
9. Foley SV (21*)
10. Jones Day SV (21*)
11. Fenwick SV (21*)
12. Skadden NY (42)
13. GDC SV (84*)
14. Ropes & Gray SF (63*)
15. Paul, Weiss NY (42)
16. Gunderson NY (21*)
17. PH SV (63*)
18. Jones Day NY (21)
19. Mayer Brown SV (126*)
20. Cleary NY (42)
21. K&E SF (21)
22. Sidley SF (21)
23. OMM SF/SV (21)
24. WSGR SV (21)
25. Goodwin NY (21)
26. Davis Polk SV (21)
27. Goodwin SV (21*)
28. STB NY (63*)
29. Rutan & Tucker OC (10)

User avatar
chicago-gunner123
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:27 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby chicago-gunner123 » Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hi all! I'd appreciate any suggestions for rounding out my bid list because it's a little on the short side. I have ties to both SV and SoCal, and a couple CA-based firms are noticeably absent from my bidlist because I have pre-OCI CBs (SoCal market). I chose SF firms only where no SV option and/or corp group located in SF.

Grades: 178-78.5
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: 3+ yrs paralegal
Preferred Market: SV/SF >>>>>>> NY
Practice Area: Corp
Misc: Secondary Journal

Bid list:
1. Shearman NY (21)
2. White & Case NY (21)
3. Proskauer NY
4. Sidley NY (21)
5. Cooley SD (42*)
6. Cooley PA (42*)
7. Milbank NY (21)
8. Fried Frank NY (21)
9. Foley SV (21*)
10. Jones Day SV (21*)
11. Fenwick SV (21*)
12. Skadden NY (42)
13. GDC SV (84*)
14. Ropes & Gray SF (63*)
15. Paul, Weiss NY (42)
16. Gunderson NY (21*)
17. PH SV (63*)
18. Jones Day NY (21)
19. Mayer Brown SV (126*)
20. Cleary NY (42)
21. K&E SF (21)
22. Sidley SF (21)
23. OMM SF/SV (21)
24. WSGR SV (21)
25. Goodwin NY (21)
26. Davis Polk SV (21)
27. Goodwin SV (21*)
28. STB NY (63*)
29. Rutan & Tucker OC (10)


You should have more of the big class New York firms higher on your list (STB, Sullcrom, Cravath,Debevoise, etc.). They are more grade selective, but they take more people so it balances out, and your grades put you in range for them. Those are often more likely CBs for someone with your grades than FF, Sidley NY, or Proskauer which take fewer people (others might disagree)

Anonymous User
Posts: 287733
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jul 23, 2017 8:27 pm

chicago-gunner123 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hi all! I'd appreciate any suggestions for rounding out my bid list because it's a little on the short side. I have ties to both SV and SoCal, and a couple CA-based firms are noticeably absent from my bidlist because I have pre-OCI CBs (SoCal market). I chose SF firms only where no SV option and/or corp group located in SF.

Grades: 178-78.5
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: 3+ yrs paralegal
Preferred Market: SV/SF >>>>>>> NY
Practice Area: Corp
Misc: Secondary Journal


You should have more of the big class New York firms higher on your list (STB, Sullcrom, Cravath,Debevoise, etc.). They are more grade selective, but they take more people so it balances out, and your grades put you in range for them. Those are often more likely CBs for someone with your grades than FF, Sidley NY, or Proskauer which take fewer people (others might disagree)


That makes sense. I was worried my grades were too marginal, but maybe I can squeak through on a good screener performance. Does this look any better?

Bid list:
1. Shearman NY (21)
2. White & Case NY (21)
3. Cravath NY (42)
4. Sullcrom NY (42)
5. Cooley SD (42*)
6. Cooley PA (42*)
7. Skadden NY (42)
8. STB NY (63*)
9. Milbank NY (21)
10. Proskauer NY
11. Sidley NY (21)
12. Fenwick SV (21*)
13. GDC SV (84*)
14. Foley SV (21*)
15. Jones Day SV (21*)
16. Fried Frank NY (21)
17. Debevoise NY (63)
18. Jones Day NY (21)
19. Ropes & Gray SF (63*)
20. Paul, Weiss NY (42)
21. Gunderson NY (21*)
22. PH SV (63*)
23. Mayer Brown SV (126*)
24. Cleary NY (42)
25. K&E SF (21)
26. Sidley SF (21)
27. WSGR SV (21)
28. OMM SF/SV (21)
29. Goodwin NY (21)
30. Davis Polk SV (21)
31. Goodwin SV (21*)
32. Rutan & Tucker OC (10)

User avatar
2014
Posts: 5940
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm

Re: Chicago OCI 2017

Postby 2014 » Sun Jul 23, 2017 8:48 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
chicago-gunner123 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Hi all! I'd appreciate any suggestions for rounding out my bid list because it's a little on the short side. I have ties to both SV and SoCal, and a couple CA-based firms are noticeably absent from my bidlist because I have pre-OCI CBs (SoCal market). I chose SF firms only where no SV option and/or corp group located in SF.

Grades: 178-78.5
URM/Female: Female
Work Exp: 3+ yrs paralegal
Preferred Market: SV/SF >>>>>>> NY
Practice Area: Corp
Misc: Secondary Journal


You should have more of the big class New York firms higher on your list (STB, Sullcrom, Cravath,Debevoise, etc.). They are more grade selective, but they take more people so it balances out, and your grades put you in range for them. Those are often more likely CBs for someone with your grades than FF, Sidley NY, or Proskauer which take fewer people (others might disagree)


That makes sense. I was worried my grades were too marginal, but maybe I can squeak through on a good screener performance. Does this look any better?

Bid list:
1. Shearman NY (21)
2. White & Case NY (21)
3. Cravath NY (42)
4. Sullcrom NY (42)
5. Cooley SD (42*)
6. Cooley PA (42*)
7. Skadden NY (42)
8. STB NY (63*)
9. Milbank NY (21)
10. Proskauer NY
11. Sidley NY (21)
12. Fenwick SV (21*)
13. GDC SV (84*)
14. Foley SV (21*)
15. Jones Day SV (21*)
16. Fried Frank NY (21)
17. Debevoise NY (63)
18. Jones Day NY (21)
19. Ropes & Gray SF (63*)
20. Paul, Weiss NY (42)
21. Gunderson NY (21*)
22. PH SV (63*)
23. Mayer Brown SV (126*)
24. Cleary NY (42)
25. K&E SF (21)
26. Sidley SF (21)
27. WSGR SV (21)
28. OMM SF/SV (21)
29. Goodwin NY (21)
30. Davis Polk SV (21)
31. Goodwin SV (21*)
32. Rutan & Tucker OC (10)

I'd bump 2 of Milbank, Proskauer and Fenwick all the way up to 3rd and move everything else down, i don't think you miss Skadden at 9 or STB at 10 in that scenario but you most likely miss all three of Milbank, Proskauer and Fenwick as you have it now. I'd also somehow get Skadden ahead of Cravath - Cravath is perceived as both (a) grade conscious and (b) harder working than it's peers (FYI - both perceptions are flawed) and both of those tend to make it fill later than the other 42 slot firms.

My knowledge gets stale by the year, someone should feel free to tell me i'm an idiot if this is wrong in light of either of the last two OCIs.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.