Best school in Illinois for IP Law, Chicago market Forum

[villainousv]

I have a technical background. Is it fair to say that Illinois is the best out of these for IP law in the chicago market:
DePaul
Loyola Chicago
UIUC
Chicago-Kent

What if you include money ? (yearly)
DePaul (20k)
Loyola Chicago (6k)
UIUC (12k)
Chicago-Kent (waiting on offer)

[Ludo!]

This one is even easier to answer than your other thread. Illinois is by far the best choice. Those other schools are terrible.

[mattviphky]

This one is even easier to answer than your other thread. Illinois is by far the best choice. Those other schools are terrible.

Really? I'm not saying that Illinois isn't better (I know it is), but is Kent really "terrible"? I'm honestly curious, because i always hear about how good of a program they have for IP. Maybe it's the usual shoe shining, but it is something I hear. Just to clarify, I'm an incoming 1L to UIUC, and I'm not trying to start an argument. However, i'm just legitimately curious why you would call them terrible?

[blurbz]

You probably saw my post in the other thread, but I'll repost it in this one: My IP friends at Illinois (who were in the top 50%) all had multiple offers. Ranging from biglaw Chicago (like Kirkland) to IP shops in California (Like Knobbe) and everything else along the spectrum. They certainly did well for themselves!

I know people at ALL of the city schools and none of them have jobs right now. Caveat: None of my friends at the city schools are IP-qualified and I doubt that any of them are in the top 10% at their respective schools.

[Ludo!]

Illinois itself is a gamble, only 15-20% of my class have biglaw jobs (although as Blurbz said, IP kids outperformed their rank), so in my opinion any school that places significantly worse than Illinois is terrible. I would put about as much stock in Kent's IP program as I would in Stetson's trial advocacy program.

[villainousv]

Thanks I know the question was similar, but it is tempting to give weight to all these alternative IP rankings and stuff.

[illini22]

Illinois itself is a gamble, only 15-20% of my class have biglaw jobs (although as Blurbz said, IP kids outperformed their rank), so in my opinion any school that places significantly worse than Illinois is terrible. I would put about as much stock in Kent's IP program as I would in Stetson's trial advocacy program.

Are you a 3L? Class of 2013 is more like 20-25% (I had an earlier post about number of firms/people). Pre-recession numbers were @22-27%, so I think we are getting close, but not yet there.

[Ludo!]

Even if it's 25% that doesn't really change my point

[09042014]

I'm not sure anyone cares about Kent and their IP program. But every other IP dood in Chicago went to Illinois for either law school or engineering school.

[romothesavior]

Illinois by a landslide. It sounds like it will still be expensive for you, but IP students do get a boost (although they aren't "secure"), which may make it a better call than for others.

[villainousv]

What's really jacking me up here is when I go to the "top IP firms" from this site: http://www.averyindex.com/patent_city_f ... cago&st=IL

and I start looking at the profiles, I see way more from Loyola, Chicago, and even DePaul than I see from UIUC, which suggests the networking advantages of being in chicago outweigh whatever purportedly makes UIUC the better choice. Can anybody try to explain that? Maybe I'm looking at the wrong firms?

[Wart]

This one is even easier to answer than your other thread. Illinois is by far the best choice. Those other schools are terrible.

Really? I'm not saying that Illinois isn't better (I know it is), but is Kent really "terrible"? I'm honestly curious, because i always hear about how good of a program they have for IP. Maybe it's the usual shoe shining, but it is something I hear. Just to clarify, I'm an incoming 1L to UIUC, and I'm not trying to start an argument. However, i'm just legitimately curious why you would call them terrible?

FWIW: A friend of mine, who is a senior partner at one of the big chicago firms, consistently refers to Kent as a "bar prep school" rather than a law school. He also mentioned that for a Kent student to be considered at his firm you pretty much had to graduate #1.

[Ludo!]

What's really jacking me up here is when I go to the "top IP firms" from this site: http://www.averyindex.com/patent_city_f ... cago&st=IL

and I start looking at the profiles, I see way more from Loyola, Chicago, and even DePaul than I see from UIUC, which suggests the networking advantages of being in chicago outweigh whatever purportedly makes UIUC the better choice. Can anybody try to explain that? Maybe I'm looking at the wrong firms?

I only saw a few firms that had more Kent grads than Illinois grads but for the ones that do there could be a number of different explanations. Illinois IP people have more of a national reach for one thing. The IP people I knew here got interviews and offers in every market conceivable with or without ties. You will find a good number of Illinois grads outside of Chicago whereas the top of the class at Kent will be represented at firms in Chicago but you would be hard pressed to find them anywhere else. Knobbe Martens in California for example has a number of Illinois associates but not a single person from Kent. Another possibility is I know people here who are technically IP eligible (hard science degrees) but didn't want to do IP and are doing other things at big firms. I doubt people from Kent have that luxury. Illinois people might have better exit options as well.