Help with UCI bid list

(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: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 06, 2018 2:50 pm

Hello! I'm in the top third at UCI and need help with bidding strategy. I have 5 spots left and don't know which firms to bid on out of the following: Cooley, Brown Rudnick, Hogan Lovells, Paul Hastings, Bryan Cave Leighton, Arnold & Porter, Irell & Manella, and White & Case.

My CDO unfortunately does not have any helpful information. Are any of these firms out of reach? Also, do you have any suggestions for firms that would be in reach? I'm currently cold apping and doing OCI. Thanks!

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Jul 06, 2018 3:12 pm

Which offices? Brown Rudnick OC usually only takes one summer, but loves UCI students. Bryan Cave generally pays below market, but loves UCI students, and the people in the OC office are great. Irell generally has a very high gpa cutoff for UCI, but takes UCI students often. White & Case often hires from UCI, as do Cooley and Hogan. As far as I know, Paul Hastings has never hired from UCI (at least in the OC office). Not sure about Arnold Porter.

I advise you to bid conservatively. I probably wouldn't waste a bid on Irell unless I was in the top 5%. I would probably go: Bryan Cave, White & Case, Cooley, Hogan, and Brown Rudnick (in no particular order).

bball

New
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 12:48 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby bball » Fri Jul 06, 2018 3:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Which offices? Brown Rudnick OC usually only takes one summer, but loves UCI students. Bryan Cave generally pays below market, but loves UCI students, and the people in the OC office are great. Irell generally has a very high gpa cutoff for UCI, but takes UCI students often. White & Case often hires from UCI, as do Cooley and Hogan. As far as I know, Paul Hastings has never hired from UCI (at least in the OC office). Not sure about Arnold Porter.

I advise you to bid conservatively. I probably wouldn't waste a bid on Irell unless I was in the top 5%. I would probably go: Bryan Cave, White & Case, Cooley, Hogan, and Brown Rudnick (in no particular order).


Thanks so much! I'm applying for offices in Orange County, San Diego, and Los Angeles.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 12:25 am

First, all of the firms on this list gave offers to UCI students last year, except Paul Hastings. Paul Hastings didn’t even give a callback to any UCI students, so I would not waste a bid on them.

Second, be careful with Hogan. I know they no-offered a 1L who summered there a few years ago. They’ve also had a lot of attorneys leave the LA office, and I don’t think they gave offers to UCI students last year.

Third, you should try to include some safety firms that typically hire a lot from UCI. That includes Bryan Cave and Brown Rudnick. I know both of those firms hired students with lower GPAs (3.5 range) over the past few years.

Arnold and Porter, Cooley, and White and Case are more grade selective at UCI, but are both really good options if you want to include them as reach firms. Both have given offers to UCI students in the past.

I think Irell is out of reach unless you have a 3.85 or above.

Hope this helps.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 3:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:First, all of the firms on this list gave offers to UCI students last year, except Paul Hastings. Paul Hastings didn’t even give a callback to any UCI students, so I would not waste a bid on them.

Second, be careful with Hogan. I know they no-offered a 1L who summered there a few years ago. They’ve also had a lot of attorneys leave the LA office, and I don’t think they gave offers to UCI students last year.

Third, you should try to include some safety firms that typically hire a lot from UCI. That includes Bryan Cave and Brown Rudnick. I know both of those firms hired students with lower GPAs (3.5 range) over the past few years.

Arnold and Porter, Cooley, and White and Case are more grade selective at UCI, but are both really good options if you want to include them as reach firms. Both have given offers to UCI students in the past.

I think Irell is out of reach unless you have a 3.85 or above.

Hope this helps.


Hi, sorry to hijack this thread, but you seemed pretty knowledgeable about UCI EIW process and I didn't see a way to direct message you. Fellow UCI rising 2L trying to get together my bid list this weekend. If you happen to have any tips or insights they'd be greatly appreciated!

Below is my current draft of my bidlist with some firms below that I'm thinking about including. GPA is a 3.95/invited to law review

1. Gibson Dunn (OC/LA)
2. Irell (OC)
3. Latham (LA/OC)
4. OMM (OC)
5. Skadden (LA)
6. Arnold & Porter (LA)
7. Morrison & Foerster (SD)
8. Hogan (LA)
9. Orrick (OC)
10. Rutan (OC)
11. Crowell (OC)
12. Cooley (LA)
13. Morgan Lewis (LA)
14. Milbank (LA)
15. Jones Day (SD/LA)
16. Paul Hastings (OC)
17. White & Case (LA)
18. Venable (LA)
19. Perkins Coie (LA)
20. Wilson Sonsini (LA)

Sheppard Mullin (LA)
K&L Gates (OC)
McDermott (OC)
Pepper Hamilton (LA)
Pillsbury (LA)

Thanks in advance

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 4:56 pm

.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:13 pm

No problem, I am happy to help!

Some of the firms you have at the top of your bid list have very high GPA cut-offs. For instance, my year, Gibson wanted top 5%, Latham wanted 3.9 or above, and Skadden wanted 3.85. You are obviously within the range for those firms, but very few other students are within that range. That means less students will be bidding on those firms, and therefore, you don't need to include them so high on your list because you are almost guaranteed an interview with them.

Instead, you should prioritize firms with lower GPA cut-offs (or firms that just generally ask for high-academic performance) that you are still really interested in. A lot more students will bid on those firms, so it's important to prioritize them so you can get interviews with those firms through the lottery process. That way, even if a firm doesn't pick you as one of their pre-selected interviews, you are more likely to get an interview with that firm via lottery because you put them high on your list.

So, because you are almost guaranteed to get interviews with the highly-selective firms, I would consider re-structuring your bid list a bit to maximize the number of interviews you get. For instance, consider moving Gibson/Latham/OMM down and moving A&P/Hogan/MoFo/Orrick up.

Also, it may have just been an anomaly last year, but several firms on your list didn't have enough students bid on them to fill their schedules. That included Mofo SD, Jones Day, and Wilson Sonsini. Not sure if that will happen again this year, but it's something to consider.

Finally, if it were me, I would also consider taking off Paul Hastings (a firm that has not hired from UCI's EIW) and replacing it with Sheppard Mullin, McDermott, or K&L Gates (who regularly hire from UCI EIW).

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 6:47 pm

.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 7:29 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:No problem, I am happy to help!

Some of the firms you have at the top of your bid list have very high GPA cut-offs. For instance, my year, Gibson wanted top 5%, Latham wanted 3.9 or above, and Skadden wanted 3.85. You are obviously within the range for those firms, but very few other students are within that range. That means less students will be bidding on those firms, and therefore, you don't need to include them so high on your list because you are almost guaranteed an interview with them.

Instead, you should prioritize firms with lower GPA cut-offs (or firms that just generally ask for high-academic performance) that you are still really interested in. A lot more students will bid on those firms, so it's important to prioritize them so you can get interviews with those firms through the lottery process. That way, even if a firm doesn't pick you as one of their pre-selected interviews, you are more likely to get an interview with that firm via lottery because you put them high on your list.

So, because you are almost guaranteed to get interviews with the highly-selective firms, I would consider re-structuring your bid list a bit to maximize the number of interviews you get. For instance, consider moving Gibson/Latham/OMM down and moving A&P/Hogan/MoFo/Orrick up.

Also, it may have just been an anomaly last year, but several firms on your list didn't have enough students bid on them to fill their schedules. That included Mofo SD, Jones Day, and Wilson Sonsini. Not sure if that will happen again this year, but it's something to consider.

Finally, if it were me, I would also consider taking off Paul Hastings (a firm that has not hired from UCI's EIW) and replacing it with Sheppard Mullin, McDermott, or K&L Gates (who regularly hire from UCI EIW).


Awesome, thanks so much for the help! Very useful info.

Yeah that makes sense to switch up my ordering. Primarily I just ranked the firms based on my interest in them and not considering strategy. I think I'll move some of the 6-13 firms higher and move the 1-5 closer to the 5-13. Also good point regarding PH, I think I might switch it with Sheppard Mullin because it seems like a pretty good firm.

Based on your experience, do you have any thoughts on targeting the Los Angeles v. Orange County offices of firms coming from UCI, or places to focus on if I'm interested in litigation?

Thanks again!


UCI recent alum here with my .02.

I had a similar gpa and followed the same advice of moving the top firms down. Worked ok except Gibson which did not pre select me and therefore did not get an interview at first (had to go during lunch). It was also the only firm I didn’t get a callback with. Not sure if it was correlated, but just an anecdote.

If there is a firm you really like that has a high gpa cut off, keep it high on your list. With your gpa you will get plenty of interviews so make sure the firms you actually like are near the top and don’t worry about the game theory aspect too much.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Jul 07, 2018 9:34 pm

.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:58 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:No problem, I am happy to help!

Some of the firms you have at the top of your bid list have very high GPA cut-offs. For instance, my year, Gibson wanted top 5%, Latham wanted 3.9 or above, and Skadden wanted 3.85. You are obviously within the range for those firms, but very few other students are within that range. That means less students will be bidding on those firms, and therefore, you don't need to include them so high on your list because you are almost guaranteed an interview with them.

Instead, you should prioritize firms with lower GPA cut-offs (or firms that just generally ask for high-academic performance) that you are still really interested in. A lot more students will bid on those firms, so it's important to prioritize them so you can get interviews with those firms through the lottery process. That way, even if a firm doesn't pick you as one of their pre-selected interviews, you are more likely to get an interview with that firm via lottery because you put them high on your list.

So, because you are almost guaranteed to get interviews with the highly-selective firms, I would consider re-structuring your bid list a bit to maximize the number of interviews you get. For instance, consider moving Gibson/Latham/OMM down and moving A&P/Hogan/MoFo/Orrick up.

Also, it may have just been an anomaly last year, but several firms on your list didn't have enough students bid on them to fill their schedules. That included Mofo SD, Jones Day, and Wilson Sonsini. Not sure if that will happen again this year, but it's something to consider.

Finally, if it were me, I would also consider taking off Paul Hastings (a firm that has not hired from UCI's EIW) and replacing it with Sheppard Mullin, McDermott, or K&L Gates (who regularly hire from UCI EIW).


Awesome, thanks so much for the help! Very useful info.

Yeah that makes sense to switch up my ordering. Primarily I just ranked the firms based on my interest in them and not considering strategy. I think I'll move some of the 6-13 firms higher and move the 1-5 closer to the 5-13. Also good point regarding PH, I think I might switch it with Sheppard Mullin because it seems like a pretty good firm.

Based on your experience, do you have any thoughts on targeting the Los Angeles v. Orange County offices of firms coming from UCI, or places to focus on if I'm interested in litigation?

Thanks again!


UCI recent alum here with my .02.

I had a similar gpa and followed the same advice of moving the top firms down. Worked ok except Gibson which did not pre select me and therefore did not get an interview at first (had to go during lunch). It was also the only firm I didn’t get a callback with. Not sure if it was correlated, but just an anecdote.

If there is a firm you really like that has a high gpa cut off, keep it high on your list. With your gpa you will get plenty of interviews so make sure the firms you actually like are near the top and don’t worry about the game theory aspect too much.


Thanks for your input. You and the other poster are adding a ton of great info that helps greatly with this process. I'm thinking about adjusting my bid list slightly to adjust for higher cut-off firms, but still keeping it in line with my preferences. Thinking something more like this,

1. Gibson Dunn (OC/LA)
2. Arnold & Porter (LA)
3. Orrick (OC)
4. Irell (OC)
5. Cooley (LA)
6. Latham (LA/OC)
7. Morrison & Foerster (SD)
8. OMM (OC)
9. Hogan (LA)
10. Skadden (LA)
11. Crowell (OC)
12. Morgan Lewis (LA)
13. Rutan (OC)
14. Wilson Sonsini (LA)
15. Milbank (LA)
16. Venable (LA)
17. Jones Day (LA/SD)
18. White & Case (LA)
19. Perkins Coie (LA)
20. Sheppard Mullin (LA)


I'm the very first anon that replied to the post. Your first ten bids are good, but 11-20 needs re-arranging. Several of the firms in your bottom half have not matched the new compensation scale (Venable, Rutan, Crowell). Also, others use black box compensation methods that only pay market first year, then below market after that (Jones Day, Venable, and also Rutan I think).

While 180 to 190 might seem like a relatively inconsequential jump, it will make a difference as you advance in your career. You want a firm is willing to pay you what other firms are paying their associates. With a 3.95, there's no reason for you to get paid less than your peers for the same work.

I would organize your bottom 10 like this. You can reorganize the first 7 in that list however you want, but I would keep the bottom 4 in the positions they are at.

Milbank
Sheppard Mullin
Perkins Coie
White & Case
Wilson Sonsini
Morgan Lewis
Crowell
Venable
Jones Day (note: notorious for paying below market, and their SD office no-offered a UCI student last year).
Rutan

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sun Jul 08, 2018 6:18 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:No problem, I am happy to help!

Some of the firms you have at the top of your bid list have very high GPA cut-offs. For instance, my year, Gibson wanted top 5%, Latham wanted 3.9 or above, and Skadden wanted 3.85. You are obviously within the range for those firms, but very few other students are within that range. That means less students will be bidding on those firms, and therefore, you don't need to include them so high on your list because you are almost guaranteed an interview with them.

Instead, you should prioritize firms with lower GPA cut-offs (or firms that just generally ask for high-academic performance) that you are still really interested in. A lot more students will bid on those firms, so it's important to prioritize them so you can get interviews with those firms through the lottery process. That way, even if a firm doesn't pick you as one of their pre-selected interviews, you are more likely to get an interview with that firm via lottery because you put them high on your list.

So, because you are almost guaranteed to get interviews with the highly-selective firms, I would consider re-structuring your bid list a bit to maximize the number of interviews you get. For instance, consider moving Gibson/Latham/OMM down and moving A&P/Hogan/MoFo/Orrick up.

Also, it may have just been an anomaly last year, but several firms on your list didn't have enough students bid on them to fill their schedules. That included Mofo SD, Jones Day, and Wilson Sonsini. Not sure if that will happen again this year, but it's something to consider.

Finally, if it were me, I would also consider taking off Paul Hastings (a firm that has not hired from UCI's EIW) and replacing it with Sheppard Mullin, McDermott, or K&L Gates (who regularly hire from UCI EIW).


Awesome, thanks so much for the help! Very useful info.

Yeah that makes sense to switch up my ordering. Primarily I just ranked the firms based on my interest in them and not considering strategy. I think I'll move some of the 6-13 firms higher and move the 1-5 closer to the 5-13. Also good point regarding PH, I think I might switch it with Sheppard Mullin because it seems like a pretty good firm.

Based on your experience, do you have any thoughts on targeting the Los Angeles v. Orange County offices of firms coming from UCI, or places to focus on if I'm interested in litigation?

Thanks again!


UCI recent alum here with my .02.

I had a similar gpa and followed the same advice of moving the top firms down. Worked ok except Gibson which did not pre select me and therefore did not get an interview at first (had to go during lunch). It was also the only firm I didn’t get a callback with. Not sure if it was correlated, but just an anecdote.

If there is a firm you really like that has a high gpa cut off, keep it high on your list. With your gpa you will get plenty of interviews so make sure the firms you actually like are near the top and don’t worry about the game theory aspect too much.


Thanks for your input. You and the other poster are adding a ton of great info that helps greatly with this process. I'm thinking about adjusting my bid list slightly to adjust for higher cut-off firms, but still keeping it in line with my preferences. Thinking something more like this,

1. Gibson Dunn (OC/LA)
2. Arnold & Porter (LA)
3. Orrick (OC)
4. Irell (OC)
5. Cooley (LA)
6. Latham (LA/OC)
7. Morrison & Foerster (SD)
8. OMM (OC)
9. Hogan (LA)
10. Skadden (LA)
11. Crowell (OC)
12. Morgan Lewis (LA)
13. Rutan (OC)
14. Wilson Sonsini (LA)
15. Milbank (LA)
16. Venable (LA)
17. Jones Day (LA/SD)
18. White & Case (LA)
19. Perkins Coie (LA)
20. Sheppard Mullin (LA)


I'm the very first anon that replied to the post. Your first ten bids are good, but 11-20 needs re-arranging. Several of the firms in your bottom half have not matched the new compensation scale (Venable, Rutan, Crowell). Also, others use black box compensation methods that only pay market first year, then below market after that (Jones Day, Venable, and also Rutan I think).

While 180 to 190 might seem like a relatively inconsequential jump, it will make a difference as you advance in your career. You want a firm is willing to pay you what other firms are paying their associates. With a 3.95, there's no reason for you to get paid less than your peers for the same work.

I would organize your bottom 10 like this. You can reorganize the first 7 in that list however you want, but I would keep the bottom 4 in the positions they are at.

Milbank
Sheppard Mullin
Perkins Coie
White & Case
Wilson Sonsini
Morgan Lewis
Crowell
Venable
Jones Day (note: notorious for paying below market, and their SD office no-offered a UCI student last year).
Rutan


Hey thanks for this. Re-did my bid list with this in mind and think its in a pretty good place. Thanks again for all the help!

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Jul 17, 2018 5:51 pm

What advice would you give someone with a 3.74 - 3.76 going through OCI, targeting LA/OC? Also, did you have any way to figure out where your GPA would put you in terms of top third, etc. ?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 12:11 am

Anonymous User wrote:What advice would you give someone with a 3.74 - 3.76 going through OCI, targeting LA/OC? Also, did you have any way to figure out where your GPA would put you in terms of top third, etc. ?


So your GPA isn’t going to count you out by any means, but how you interview and whether you come across as a good fit (aka personable, friendly) will be much more important. My advice is to do as much research as possible on the practice groups for each firm and come up with good, specific reasons why you want to work at that firm. You probably won’t be competitive at super grade selective firms (Jones Day/Gibson/Irell) but you will be fine at other firms.

For what it’s worth, I know someone that graduated this year with a 3.79 and was magna cum laude (top 12%). Other than that it’s pretty hard to guess what percentage rank you’re in. But fit is much more important than exact rank.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Jul 18, 2018 3:09 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:What advice would you give someone with a 3.74 - 3.76 going through OCI, targeting LA/OC? Also, did you have any way to figure out where your GPA would put you in terms of top third, etc. ?


So your GPA isn’t going to count you out by any means, but how you interview and whether you come across as a good fit (aka personable, friendly) will be much more important. My advice is to do as much research as possible on the practice groups for each firm and come up with good, specific reasons why you want to work at that firm. You probably won’t be competitive at super grade selective firms (Jones Day/Gibson/Irell) but you will be fine at other firms.

For what it’s worth, I know someone that graduated this year with a 3.79 and was magna cum laude (top 12%). Other than that it’s pretty hard to guess what percentage rank you’re in. But fit is much more important than exact rank.



Thank you so much! This was very helpful.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:57 pm

Anonymous User wrote:No problem, I am happy to help!

...


Hi, we wrapped up with EIW so I thought I'd revive this thread! What was your experience like regarding callback timing or offers? So far doing decently well in Los Angeles, but have not heard back from any firms in Orange County (including all the major players). Have only received a few rejections, but silence from everywhere else. Did you have any luck getting callbacks or offers at firms that didn't get back to you right away?

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Aug 04, 2018 7:52 pm

Hey I’m in a similar boat. Would you mind revealing what firms have given out callbacks already and what firms have dinged?

I know bryan cave, Brown rudnick, Alston, pepper Hamilton, rutan, and Sheppard Mullin have given out callbacks and Latham dings.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:28 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Hey I’m in a similar boat. Would you mind revealing what firms have given out callbacks already and what firms have dinged?

I know bryan cave, Brown rudnick, Alston, pepper Hamilton, rutan, and Sheppard Mullin have given out callbacks and Latham dings.


I think at this point pretty much everywhere has given out callbacks. Probably on a hold list if you haven't heard back at all yet.

Anonymous User
Posts: 325765
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Help with UCI bid list

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 10, 2018 6:15 pm

Wen I did EIW there were a handful of firms that simply never got back to me. I would say if you haven’t gotten a callback yet, it’s most likely a ding. A lot of firms send rejections through snail mail, so be sure to check your mail box.

That being said, don’t give up. You could be on a hold list. I know last hear, Bryan Cave and a few other firms had several waves of callbacks.



Return to “Legal Employment?

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.