Georgetown EIW - 2016 Forum

[Minnietron]

Do many employers have hard GPA cutoffs? Where do they tend to fall?

pm me if you want i can send you 2015 gpa data it has mins as well as max and median. mins will typically be cutoff, but sometimes there are outliers for like extraordinary candidates

Athletes & babes

And nepotism. If you are an athletic babe, whose mother is a rainmaking partner at Sulcrom, you too can get an SA with a 3.22 (purely hypothetical example)

[ladybug1989]

Is it too soon to get this cycle's EIW thread rolling? I met with a Career Counselor last week who told me that, despite what I thought was the conventional wisdom to bid conservatively, I should to be more not less aggressive in bidding firms where I was below median, both in DC and generally. Wished I'd had a EIW thread to share it in

I can give specific transfer advice if anyone wants it (quote and I can PM).

A word of advice, our career center is pretty good at hustling to get you in front of interviewers. But I would STRONGY CAUTION their advice upon all other matters.

TLS wisdom provides a solid set of tips that should be followed, which are often contradictory to OCS advice.

Would like advice please!

[Anonymous User]

Anyone have any experience doing EIW as a 3L in the joint J.D./Tax LLM program? My understanding is we can bid on the 2L schedule, but I'm wondering how successful people have been getting a tax specific summer after 3L?

[Glasseyes]

Can someone critique my bidlist (mainly top 20). Targeting corporate; preference is DC, then NY. GPA in the high 3.6X range / in-between top 10-15%.

Are STB and Davis Polk too low??

1. Latham & Watkins DC
2. Sidley NY
3. Debevoise NY
4. Latham & Watkins NY
5. Skadden DC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
6. Fried Frank DC
7. Kirkand & Ellis DC
8. Gibson Dunn DC
9. Kirkland & Ellis NY
10. Weil NY
-----------------------------------------------------------
11. Prosekauer NY
12. Shearman & Sterling NY
13. Paul, Weiss NY
14. Milbank NY
15. Cahill NY
16. Linklaters NY
-------------------------------------------------------
17. White & Case NY
18. Clifford Chance NY
19. Davis Polk NY
20. STB NY
21. Willkie Farr NY
---------------------------------------------------------
22. Skadden NY
23. Ropes & Gray NY
24. Goodwin Proctor NY
25. Fried Frank NY
26. Dechert
--------------------------------------------------------
27. Morgan Lewis NY
28. Cadwalader NY
29. Sullivan and Cromwell NY
30. Freshfields NY
31. Cravath NY
----------------------------------------------------
32. Cleary NY
33. Schulte Roth NY
34. Cooley NY
35. Paul Hastings NY
36. McDermott NY
37. Akin NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
38. Chadbourne NY
39. Jones Day NY
40. Kaye Scholer NY
41. Greenberg Traurig NY
42. Vinson & Elkins
43. Mintz Levin NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
44. Baker & McKenzie
45. Allen & Overy NY
46. Pillsbury NY
47. Baker Botts NY
48. Baker Hostetler NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
49. Mayer Brown
50. Curtis, Mallet

You need to revisit the firms that actually have corporate groups in DC - you're currently leaving off Hogan and Covington, which are probably the two largest and strongest corporate practices in town. Cov will be a dick about grades, but they also take the biggest class of any DC firm, so try anyway. There are several other satellite firms with reasonable corporate practices in DC that you don't have listed, while some of the ones in your list barely do corps at all. Spend some more time with Nalp, Chambers (partners), and the firm websites to try and determine how big the corp groups are.

[usn26]

Cov will be a dick about grades

Like, in the interview? As in, "Oh, I see you have a 3.75. Why are you an idiot?"?

[Anonymous User]

Covington has definitely called back high 3.6Xs last year.

[Anonymous User]

The spreadsheet with min/median/max from 2015 shows Covington with a min of like 3.3-is that min for interviewed at all, call back, offered, or accepted?

[Glasseyes]

Cov will be a dick about grades

Like, in the interview? As in, "Oh, I see you have a 3.75. Why are you an idiot?"?

Nah, they'll smile during the interview either way. It's a cordial place, with a quiet, reserved, hyper-academic vibe. People either love it or hate it (I've heard the new building dubbed the "fortress of solitude"), but the firm is supposed to be reasonably friendly either way. The spreadsheet from last year showed them with a fairly hard cutoff around 3.8 with what I assume were some spectacularly compelling candidates (either URM, supremely credentialed, kids of Holder's friends, or some combination of the above) with high 3.6ish grades. Maybe they've gone soft in the intervening year. Either way, they hire the biggest class of any firm in DC, so it's worth trying for, unlike Williams & Connolly where your 3.6x marks you a deadman the second you bid.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone critique my bidlist (mainly top 20). Targeting corporate; preference is DC, then NY. GPA in the high 3.6X range / in-between top 10-15%.

Are STB and Davis Polk too low??

1. Latham & Watkins DC
2. Sidley NY
3. Debevoise NY
4. Latham & Watkins NY
5. Skadden DC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
6. Fried Frank DC
7. Kirkand & Ellis DC
8. Gibson Dunn DC
9. Kirkland & Ellis NY
10. Weil NY
-----------------------------------------------------------
11. Prosekauer NY
12. Shearman & Sterling NY
13. Paul, Weiss NY
14. Milbank NY
15. Cahill NY
16. Linklaters NY
-------------------------------------------------------
17. White & Case NY
18. Clifford Chance NY
19. Davis Polk NY
20. STB NY
21. Willkie Farr NY
---------------------------------------------------------
22. Skadden NY
23. Ropes & Gray NY
24. Goodwin Proctor NY
25. Fried Frank NY
26. Dechert
--------------------------------------------------------
27. Morgan Lewis NY
28. Cadwalader NY
29. Sullivan and Cromwell NY
30. Freshfields NY
31. Cravath NY
----------------------------------------------------
32. Cleary NY
33. Schulte Roth NY
34. Cooley NY
35. Paul Hastings NY
36. McDermott NY
37. Akin NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
38. Chadbourne NY
39. Jones Day NY
40. Kaye Scholer NY
41. Greenberg Traurig NY
42. Vinson & Elkins
43. Mintz Levin NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
44. Baker & McKenzie
45. Allen & Overy NY
46. Pillsbury NY
47. Baker Botts NY
48. Baker Hostetler NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
49. Mayer Brown
50. Curtis, Mallet

You need to revisit the firms that actually have corporate groups in DC - you're currently leaving off Hogan and Covington, which are probably the two largest and strongest corporate practices in town. Cov will be a dick about grades, but they also take the biggest class of any DC firm, so try anyway. There are several other satellite firms with reasonable corporate practices in DC that you don't have listed, while some of the ones in your list barely do corps at all. Spend some more time with Nalp, Chambers (partners), and the firm websites to try and determine how big the corp groups are.

I have an interview with Hogan lined up already. What DC firms besides covington have corporate practices in DC? I built my bid list cross referencing Chambers, NALP and firm websites to see how many associates were in the corporate groups for the firms I bid. Latham was the largest with 35; Sadden, Gibson have 10, fried frank 20. Am I missing other DC firms strong in corporate???

[buckiguy_sucks]

The spreadsheet with min/median/max from 2015 shows Covington with a min of like 3.3-is that min for interviewed at all, call back, offered, or accepted?

It's accepted

[Anonymous User]

I'm top 5% but is it still a waste to bid on W&C if I don't have a clerkship lined up?

[Anonymous User]

Can someone critique my bidlist (mainly top 20). Targeting corporate; preference is DC, then NY. GPA in the high 3.6X range / in-between top 10-15%.

Are STB and Davis Polk too low??

1. Latham & Watkins DC
2. Sidley NY
3. Debevoise NY
4. Latham & Watkins NY
5. Skadden DC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
6. Fried Frank DC
7. Kirkand & Ellis DC
8. Gibson Dunn DC
9. Kirkland & Ellis NY
10. Weil NY
-----------------------------------------------------------
11. Prosekauer NY
12. Shearman & Sterling NY
13. Paul, Weiss NY
14. Milbank NY
15. Cahill NY
16. Linklaters NY
-------------------------------------------------------
17. White & Case NY
18. Clifford Chance NY
19. Davis Polk NY
20. STB NY
21. Willkie Farr NY
---------------------------------------------------------
22. Skadden NY
23. Ropes & Gray NY
24. Goodwin Proctor NY
25. Fried Frank NY
26. Dechert
--------------------------------------------------------
27. Morgan Lewis NY
28. Cadwalader NY
29. Sullivan and Cromwell NY
30. Freshfields NY
31. Cravath NY
----------------------------------------------------
32. Cleary NY
33. Schulte Roth NY
34. Cooley NY
35. Paul Hastings NY
36. McDermott NY
37. Akin NY
----------------------------------------------------------------
38. Chadbourne NY
39. Jones Day NY
40. Kaye Scholer NY
41. Greenberg Traurig NY
42. Vinson & Elkins
43. Mintz Levin NY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
44. Baker & McKenzie
45. Allen & Overy NY
46. Pillsbury NY
47. Baker Botts NY
48. Baker Hostetler NY
-------------------------------------------------------------------
49. Mayer Brown
50. Curtis, Mallet

You need to revisit the firms that actually have corporate groups in DC - you're currently leaving off Hogan and Covington, which are probably the two largest and strongest corporate practices in town. Cov will be a dick about grades, but they also take the biggest class of any DC firm, so try anyway. There are several other satellite firms with reasonable corporate practices in DC that you don't have listed, while some of the ones in your list barely do corps at all. Spend some more time with Nalp, Chambers (partners), and the firm websites to try and determine how big the corp groups are.

I have an interview with Hogan lined up already. What DC firms besides covington have corporate practices in DC? I built my bid list cross referencing Chambers, NALP and firm websites to see how many associates were in the corporate groups for the firms I bid. Latham was the largest with 35; Sadden, Gibson have 10, fried frank 20. Am I missing other DC firms strong in corporate???

Hogan DC is doing pre-OCI recruitment?

[buckiguy_sucks]

I'm top 5% but is it still a waste to bid on W&C if I don't have a clerkship lined up?

Does anyone

[Londonbear]

Is there any value or way to address just missing top third? I have a 3.44 and top third is 3.46 for my section

There are just my thoughts, but I'd say no - your GPA is what it is. If employers have a firm cutoff, all the explanation in the world won't help. If employers don't have a firm cutoff, then interviewing skills are going to make the difference. If an interviewer specifically brings up your GPA, then of course a reasonable reply is in order. I wouldn't proactively mention it.

Would putting it on my resume just make me look butt-hurt like "GPA 3.44 /Top third 3.46" or something

I appreciate that all the big firms will know about where this puts me but I'm just wondering for smaller firms or other employers in the future

Just put the GPA.

I'm going to say the opposite. I did GPA 3.4x (Top 1/3: 3.4y) when I was .01 off and multiple firms said something along the lines of "so you're top third . . ."

Career services also told me to do this.

Career services tells you to do a lot of things, and some things they're wrong about. I actually would likely agree with Capitol on this point. Interviewers are aware of what GT's cutoffs are, and if you miss top third, you miss top third. It's the harsh world of BigLaw. Close is sometimes not good enough, and you putting it in there is just a very clear reminder of how you fell short. And I completely agree with the bolded statement.

Are you sure about that? I don't know exactly what info they get, but it never seemed like they knew what section you're in. And if you don't point out how close your are, you could be doing yourself a disservice: If you're in section 5 with a 3.4 I do think you should point out that you're in the exact same spot as someone with a 3.5 in section 3 or a 3.49 in section 1, and well ahead of someone with a 3.4 in either of those sections.

Still missing the point. All they care is whether you made it or didn't. YOU POINTING IT OUT MEANS YOU DIDN'T MAKE IT. You're competing within your section. It is irrelevant if your GPA would've made it in another section. Don't waste time pointing out a negative and trying to correct it if they didn't ask for it. Use that short interview time to bring yourself up and make yourself stand out in something they actually care about. But hey listen to the anon person who might or might not have done EIW.

[Anonymous User]

Still missing the point. All they care is whether you made it or didn't. YOU POINTING IT OUT MEANS YOU DIDN'T MAKE IT.

You not pointing it out also means you didn't make it otherwise you'd have it on your resume.

They'll know either way you're not top third might as well show them you're close.

[TLSModBot]

I'm top 5% but is it still a waste to bid on W&C if I don't have a clerkship lined up?

Only if you're not on main journal.

[Anonymous User]

Career services tells you to do a lot of things, and some things they're wrong about. I actually would likely agree with Capitol on this point. Interviewers are aware of what GT's cutoffs are, and if you miss top third, you miss top third. It's the harsh world of BigLaw. Close is sometimes not good enough, and you putting it in there is just a very clear reminder of how you fell short. And I completely agree with the bolded statement.

Are you sure about that? I don't know exactly what info they get, but it never seemed like they knew what section you're in. And if you don't point out how close your are, you could be doing yourself a disservice: If you're in section 5 with a 3.4 I do think you should point out that you're in the exact same spot as someone with a 3.5 in section 3 or a 3.49 in section 1, and well ahead of someone with a 3.4 in either of those sections.

Still missing the point. All they care is whether you made it or didn't. YOU POINTING IT OUT MEANS YOU DIDN'T MAKE IT. You're competing within your section. It is irrelevant if your GPA would've made it in another section. Don't waste time pointing out a negative and trying to correct it if they didn't ask for it. Use that short interview time to bring yourself up and make yourself stand out in something they actually care about. But hey listen to the anon person who might or might not have done EIW.

You're missing my point. If an interviewer is looking at someone in section 5 with a 3.40 and someone in section 3 with a 3.45, they're going to assume the section 3 kid did much better than the section 5 kid, when the converse is true. By pointing out that you are .01 or .02 off of top 3rd, you're at least showing them that you are decidedly above median instead of having someone think on its face that a 3.40 is close to median.

Again, this is all assuming they don't know what section you're in. If they do, it's a moot point and cap's advice is correct, because then it's just signaling that you missed. But I do think by putting it there its signaling your class rank effectively, especially if you're in section 5. Again, I had an interviewer tell me "so you're top 1/3 in your class" when I did it, and someone certainly wouldn't think that if you just leave 3.40 on its own.

[Anonymous User]

All further discussion on missing cutoffs is just flame plz stap

[Anonymous User]

someone mentioned having a Hogan DC interview lined up already - is this from mass mailing? only for corporate practice?

[Anonymous User]

someone mentioned having a Hogan DC interview lined up already - is this from mass mailing? only for corporate practice?

+1 also interested

[Anonymous User]

Does a transfer from a T4 have a realistic shot at LA firms? Only if they're on the lower end of the Vault rankings? Waste of bids? Some family ties there but nothing too significant other than a desire to be there.

[TLSModBot]

Does a transfer from a T4 have a realistic shot at LA firms? Only if they're on the lower end of the Vault rankings? Waste of bids? Some family ties there but nothing too significant other than a desire to be there.

GULC tends to send people most to NY and DC, so even a non-transfer GULC student is gonna have a moderately tough time getting people in there. I think it might depend on where your T4 is (is it in CA or near LA?) and what your grades there were.

I'd say push hard for NY if you really want to maximize your Biglaw chances - GULC is a coin toss for BigLaw in the first place, being a lower-ranked school transfer isn't going to help your chances.

(Disclaimer: Not a transfer and did not target LA for OCI. Am working off of personal experience and those of friends, general data on GULC's hiring statistics, plus where GULC students tend to go).

[Anonymous User]

Does a transfer from a T4 have a realistic shot at LA firms? Only if they're on the lower end of the Vault rankings? Waste of bids? Some family ties there but nothing too significant other than a desire to be there.

GULC tends to send people most to NY and DC, so even a non-transfer GULC student is gonna have a moderately tough time getting people in there. I think it might depend on where your T4 is (is it in CA or near LA?) and what your grades there were.

I'd say push hard for NY if you really want to maximize your Biglaw chances - GULC is a coin toss for BigLaw in the first place, being a lower-ranked school transfer isn't going to help your chances.

(Disclaimer: Not a transfer and did not target LA for OCI. Am working off of personal experience and those of friends, general data on GULC's hiring statistics, plus where GULC students tend to go).

Really appreciate the feedback. T4 is in the Midwest and in the top 10%. 3.75GPA. I was planning on bidding NY in the first place but would prefer LA but was wondering on chances as a transfer since OCI seems like a toss up sometimes anyways.

[BmoreOrLess]

Everyone I know who really wanted CA got CA, but they were all people who seemed like they would be towards the top of my section (I have no actual knowledge of their grades tho).

[Anonymous User]

Does a transfer from a T4 have a realistic shot at LA firms? Only if they're on the lower end of the Vault rankings? Waste of bids? Some family ties there but nothing too significant other than a desire to be there.

GULC tends to send people most to NY and DC, so even a non-transfer GULC student is gonna have a moderately tough time getting people in there. I think it might depend on where your T4 is (is it in CA or near LA?) and what your grades there were.

I'd say push hard for NY if you really want to maximize your Biglaw chances - GULC is a coin toss for BigLaw in the first place, being a lower-ranked school transfer isn't going to help your chances.

(Disclaimer: Not a transfer and did not target LA for OCI. Am working off of personal experience and those of friends, general data on GULC's hiring statistics, plus where GULC students tend to go).

Class of 17 transfer, I can confirm this