Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Seek and share information about clerkship applications, clerkship hiring timelines, and post-clerkship employment opportunities.
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about clerkship applications and clerkship hiring. 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: 273396
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:35 pm

I interviewed with a d. ct. judge in a district with a heavy patent docket and a COA judge in flyover country (think 6th, 8th, 10th or 11th Circuits). I was lucky enough to receive offers from both. My plan is to do IP litigation at a biglaw firm after my clerkship. Is the prestige bump from doing a COA clerkship enough to outweigh the substantive usefulness of clerking for a district judge who has a lot of patent cases? The district judge said I would spend about 3/4 of my time working on patent cases. Obviously, I wouldn't spend any time working on patent cases with the COA judge, although I may work on other IP cases (Lanham Act or copyright) if any happen to be on the docket (although this appears to be rare). How would my biglaw firm view the d. ct. clerkship as opposed to the COA clerkship?

User avatar
seizmaar
Posts: 759
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2014 2:58 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby seizmaar » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:38 pm

go to E.D. Texas bro

User avatar
Elston Gunn
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Elston Gunn » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:57 pm

I'm pretty sure the answer here is whichever one you'd rather do.

User avatar
Shaggier1
Posts: 721
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 8:57 am

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Shaggier1 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:02 pm

go to E.D. Texas bro


+1

User avatar
Dr. Review
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:51 am

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Dr. Review » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:08 pm

seizmaar wrote:go to E.D. Texas bro

+1

User avatar
Desert Fox
Progressively loosing literacy
Posts: 14423
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Desert Fox » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:10 pm

1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby bk1 » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:18 pm

I'd lean patent docket here unless you were thinking of exiting patent litigation in the future.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273396
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:22 pm

Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover


(Judge Bacharach)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273396
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover


(Judge Bacharach)

I don't understand the implication here.

User avatar
seizmaar
Posts: 759
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2014 2:58 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby seizmaar » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:17 pm

oklahoma city sucks?

Jchance
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby Jchance » Thu Nov 20, 2014 7:43 pm

OP, would you mind PM me who the d. ct. judge is?
Last edited by Jchance on Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
jbagelboy
Posts: 9647
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby jbagelboy » Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:50 pm

the relevant trial docket unless you want to be a law professor, in which case appellate experience even in some remote circuit seems to be preferable.

qwerfdsa
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:02 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby qwerfdsa » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover


(Judge Bacharach)


Was there something in particular regarding Judge Bacharach, or was that just an example of a fly over state?

hiima3L
Posts: 837
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:26 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby hiima3L » Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:40 pm

D. ct. and it's not even close.

If you want to litigate, trial court experience is vastly better than appellate court experience.

User avatar
fats provolone
Posts: 7125
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 4:44 pm

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Postby fats provolone » Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:24 pm

enjoy texarkana




Return to “Judicial Clerkships”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.