Let's Talk San Francisco - Taking Questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

When looking at SF Bay Area.. Is there a huge distinction b/w the SF firms (people, culture, grade selectivity, etc.) and their counterparts in PA/SV offices?

Edit: Specifically for their IP groups.

In my experience, the Palo Alto folks were more legit science people - PhDs and that sort of thing. SF a little less nerdy, more hip. Might be self-selection, though.

[Anonymous User]

Can't find an OCI thread, so I wanted to ask here. Rising 2L at S, below median (but not straight P's), really want SF. Have some good ties besides attending law school here. Some prior PI legal work experience. Interested in litigation (not IP). Advice on which firms to bid on?

Thanks for any help. OCS not being very responsive.

[Anonymous User]

Can't find an OCI thread, so I wanted to ask here. Rising 2L at S, below median (but not straight P's), really want SF. Have some good ties besides attending law school here. Some prior PI legal work experience. Interested in litigation (not IP). Advice on which firms to bid on?

Thanks for any help. OCS not being very responsive.

OCS at SLS is godawful. Sorry they still haven't learned how to provide any decent assistance...

Since you've said below median but not straight Ps, I'm going to give advice as though you have 2 Hs. You will likely want to bid another city other than SF (I'd suggest NYC, since a lot of firms will be happy to take a non-straight P SLSer).

For SF, here are firms that I think might be in your wheelhouse:
- Paul Hastings
- Farella (they really like SF ties, and have taken people with low grades in the past)
- Shartsis Friese
- Cooley
- Hanson Bridgett
- Reed Smith (very large SF office, very few SLS kids bid on them)
- O'Melveny (they run the gamut from kids with great grades, like 7+ Hs, to kids with 1 H)
- Kirkland (they dip below median for SLS kids every year)

Reaches, but might be worth it (less so if you only have 1 H, that'd put you likely bottom 20ish percent of the class): Latham, A&P, Akin Gump, Jones Day, Bingham, Sidley.

Avoid the ones you'd think to avoid: Gibson, Covington, Keker.

If you're okay with the Valley, I'd suggest adding DLA Piper, Faegre Baker Daniels (new Valley office just about to open, and they're chronically underbid at OCI), Fenwick, and some of the NYC satellites, like Skadden.

Hope that helps! Good luck, keep focused, and don't freak out. People with your grades often wind up with many offers. Start thinking, though, about how willing you are to leave the Bay. NYC firms will be fairly easy to get, so I'd go hard for a few that love SLS kids and aren't that grade conscious for them (Paul Weiss, Skadden, Milbank, Curtis-Mallet). You've got 30 bids and most of them will be underbid, so I'd suggest a 2:1 SF/Valley:NYC split, to maximize your chances.

Hell, find an NYC office you like, get an offer, and ask to split with their SF office.

-BW's Beard.

[Anonymous User]

Rising 2L from S here. My grades should put me around median.
I want to do transactional work and stay in the Bay Area. I think I'd be equally happy in either SF or SV. Some practice areas that I'm potentially interested in include emerging companies, venture capital, technology transactions and IP licensing, trademark, media/entertainment, privacy, and M&A.

Firms I'm currently looking at for OCI bids include:
Cooley
WSGR
Fenwick & West
Gibson Dunn
Latham & Watkins
MoFo
Sheppard Mullin
Davis Polk

Obviously I'll be bidding on a lot more than just these firms, but these are the main firms on my radar that will likely be at the top of my bid list. Any other firms that I should strongly consider as I put together my bid list?

[Anonymous User]

When looking at SF Bay Area.. Is there a huge distinction b/w the SF firms (people, culture, grade selectivity, etc.) and their counterparts in PA/SV offices?

Edit: Specifically for their IP groups.

I found SV firms to be less grade selective than SF firms. People/culture I felt was more firm specific than specific to SF vs SV.

[Anonymous User]

Rising 2L from S here. My grades should put me around median.
I want to do transactional work and stay in the Bay Area. I think I'd be equally happy in either SF or SV. Some practice areas that I'm potentially interested in include emerging companies, venture capital, technology transactions and IP licensing, trademark, media/entertainment, privacy, and M&A.

Firms I'm currently looking at for OCI bids include:
Cooley
WSGR
Fenwick & West
Gibson Dunn
Latham & Watkins
MoFo
Sheppard Mullin
Davis Polk

Obviously I'll be bidding on a lot more than just these firms, but these are the main firms on my radar that will likely be at the top of my bid list. Any other firms that I should strongly consider as I put together my bid list?

K&E

[Anonymous User]

Anon above. I suppose they are somewhat similar; GDC seemed more outgoing and Covington a bit more inwardly cerebral, but they were more similar to each other than either was to MoFo.

And I wound up picking one of the "indigenous," small SF boutique firms instead of any of the above. My choice actually came down between it and a major firm that wasn't one of the three listed. Choice was mainly for training and responsibility opportunities, along with firm culture, rather than practice interests.

Thanks for the really helpful responses everyone! As someone also struggling with a not too responsive HYS OCS, what are these boutique firms that would be worth picking over Big Law? I just don't even know what any of these boutiques are or where to start looking.

[Anonymous User]

Rising 2L from S here. My grades should put me around median.
I want to do transactional work and stay in the Bay Area. I think I'd be equally happy in either SF or SV. Some practice areas that I'm potentially interested in include emerging companies, venture capital, technology transactions and IP licensing, trademark, media/entertainment, privacy, and M&A.

Firms I'm currently looking at for OCI bids include:
Cooley
WSGR
Fenwick & West
Gibson Dunn
Latham & Watkins
MoFo
Sheppard Mullin
Davis Polk

Obviously I'll be bidding on a lot more than just these firms, but these are the main firms on my radar that will likely be at the top of my bid list. Any other firms that I should strongly consider as I put together my bid list?

DLA Piper SV

[Anonymous User]

Anon above. I suppose they are somewhat similar; GDC seemed more outgoing and Covington a bit more inwardly cerebral, but they were more similar to each other than either was to MoFo.

And I wound up picking one of the "indigenous," small SF boutique firms instead of any of the above. My choice actually came down between it and a major firm that wasn't one of the three listed. Choice was mainly for training and responsibility opportunities, along with firm culture, rather than practice interests.

Thanks for the really helpful responses everyone! As someone also struggling with a not too responsive HYS OCS, what are these boutique firms that would be worth picking over Big Law? I just don't even know what any of these boutiques are or where to start looking.

I looked hard at places like Farella Braun, Keker, Cotchett Pitre, Howard Rice, (which doesn't exist anymore, now it's A&P's SF office), andMcManis Faulkner (San Jose).

Maybe also check out Girard Gibbs, Phillips & Cohen, Lewis Feinberg (Oakland), Weaver Austin (Oakland), Rosen Bien (Oakland), and Lieff Cabraser. There are a lot of very good midsized firms in the SF area, which run from Keker/Lieff in terms of selectivity way down to taking people with straight Ps and demonstrated interest in the given practice.

- BW's Beard.

[Anonymous User]

I'm a CA native, did my 1L year at a lower T50 in the Midwest, have no IP background, and will be transferring to Berkeley (unless I'm accepted at Stanford). I want to practice in SF, though I'm open to SV and PA. Litigation and transactional work both seem very interesting, but I think litigation is more up my alley. Any suggestions on which firms I should be targeting?

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for the thread. I am bottom 10% @ DCNG, strong ties to LA/SV/SF/Sac. Do you have any suggestions for mid-size or regional firms who might be interested in me despite my GPA?

[Anonymous User]

I looked hard at places like Farella Braun, Keker, Cotchett Pitre, Howard Rice, (which doesn't exist anymore, now it's A&P's SF office), andMcManis Faulkner (San Jose).

Maybe also check out Girard Gibbs, Phillips & Cohen, Lewis Feinberg (Oakland), Weaver Austin (Oakland), Rosen Bien (Oakland), and Lieff Cabraser. There are a lot of very good midsized firms in the SF area, which run from Keker/Lieff in terms of selectivity way down to taking people with straight Ps and demonstrated interest in the given practice.

- BW's Beard.

Here are some details on these smaller firms that BW's beard listed:

-Farella is a SF-native midsized firm that is supposed to have a good atmosphere, sounded cool to me. Been told that hours are better than biglaw. On the other hand, I've heard it described as a place where you work as much as biglaw but don't get paid as much. Primarily defense.

-Keker is an Article III clerks-only sort of place that litigates pretty much across the spectrum, does a lot of big cases. Primarily defense.

-Cotchett Pitre is a plaintiffs firm, unlike the two above, and is located on the Peninsula, not in SF. Supposed to be a great place, though.

-Howard Rice, like he said, merged with Arnold and Porter. I've heard good things about the A&P office, actually - that it has good hours. Working at A&P, of course, isn't a boutique, so it doesn't really belong on this list.

-Lieff is a plaintiffs firm, one of the biggest in the nation, and SF is its home office. Great firm, again, plaintiffs only (primarily employment, personal injury, and antitrust/securities). Similarly selective like Keker, but for slightly different things: likes PI focus and great credentials.

-Heard good things about Lewis Feinberg; it's a plaintiffs firm that, I think, does exclusively employment litigation.

[Anonymous User]

How would someone's odds be for SF transactional, given median at Columbia?

Any general insight into some of the transactional groups in the city? Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Rising 2L from S here. My grades should put me around median.
I want to do transactional work and stay in the Bay Area. I think I'd be equally happy in either SF or SV. Some practice areas that I'm potentially interested in include emerging companies, venture capital, technology transactions and IP licensing, trademark, media/entertainment, privacy, and M&A.

Firms I'm currently looking at for OCI bids include:
Cooley
WSGR
Fenwick & West
Gibson Dunn
Latham & Watkins
MoFo
Sheppard Mullin
Davis Polk

Obviously I'll be bidding on a lot more than just these firms, but these are the main firms on my radar that will likely be at the top of my bid list. Any other firms that I should strongly consider as I put together my bid list?

Goodwin Procter for emerging company/VC work.

[francesfarmer]

What is the deal with general CA ties? I'm from socal (north of LA) but I'd like to make it to SF from CLS. Would I be able to spin where I'm from?

[Anonymous User]

I'm a CA native, did my 1L year at a lower T50 in the Midwest, have no IP background, and will be transferring to Berkeley (unless I'm accepted at Stanford). I want to practice in SF, though I'm open to SV and PA. Litigation and transactional work both seem very interesting, but I think litigation is more up my alley. Any suggestions on which firms I should be targeting?

Jones Day tends to be less interested in school prestige so there may be less issue of being a transfer (if the "transfers get evaluated as if they are doing OCI at the old school" conventional wisdom is true, which I am not convinced is the case). The SF office tilts toward litigation and the office has been growing. 9 summers this year, including splits.

--A non-SF JD Assoc.

ETA: Bob M*tt*lst**dt [i-e-ae removed to avoid the all-seeing Google engines] is kick a$$. He's a key reason I am at Jones Day even though I'm not a litigator and not in SF.

[Anonymous User]

What is the deal with general CA ties? I'm from socal (north of LA) but I'd like to make it to SF from CLS. Would I be able to spin where I'm from?

It kinda depends on the firm, but I tend to think you're okay. I talked with our head of recruiting this summer, who insisted that it was near impossible to get an offer with the office unless you were (a) at a Bay Area school, (b) went to a Bay Area undergrad, or (c) were from northern California. All but one of us fit this bill, so it seems like it wasn't actually "required," but it stuck with me.

I think that most firms that are really worried about ties will probably be okay with general CA ties, provided you can articulate a work-related or personal reason why being in SF would be better for you than LA.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for the thread. I am bottom 10% @ DCNG, strong ties to LA/SV/SF/Sac. Do you have any suggestions for mid-size or regional firms who might be interested in me despite my GPA?

IIRC, Berkeley had a list of midsize/small firms that had hired Boalt grads in the past. You might be able to find it on the Berkeley Law website.

Best of luck!

[bravos89]

How would someone's odds be for SF transactional, given median at Columbia?

Any general insight into some of the transactional groups in the city? Thanks!

I think it might be a big tough. I was low Stone looking for SF transactional and had a pretty hard time in SF but my ties were not that strong.

I think it might be doable if you have rock solid ties but I definitely wouldn't feel comfortable counting on it. Definitely give serious consideration to other safer markets like NY. You should be able to bid all of the SF firms that come to EIP and also be able to bid a considerable number of safer NY firms.

[Anonymous User]

What is the deal with general CA ties? I'm from socal (north of LA) but I'd like to make it to SF from CLS. Would I be able to spin where I'm from?

It kinda depends on the firm, but I tend to think you're okay. I talked with our head of recruiting this summer, who insisted that it was near impossible to get an offer with the office unless you were (a) at a Bay Area school, (b) went to a Bay Area undergrad, or (c) were from northern California. All but one of us fit this bill, so it seems like it wasn't actually "required," but it stuck with me.

I think that most firms that are really worried about ties will probably be okay with general CA ties, provided you can articulate a work-related or personal reason why being in SF would be better for you than LA.

To provide a counterpoint: I worked in an SV office and quite a few of the summers had few or limited ties to CA. An interest in tech/startup transactional work was usually what got them past their lack of geographical ties. I think it can depend on the firm.

How would someone's odds be for SF transactional, given median at Columbia?

Any general insight into some of the transactional groups in the city? Thanks!

You have a much better shot at SV transactional than SF transactional (and I personally think SV transactional tends to be more interesting). If you really want the Bay Area I'd gun for SV firms, but do agree having NYC as a backup is your safest bet.

[Anonymous User]

I think it might be a big tough. I was low Stone looking for SF transactional and had a pretty hard time in SF but my ties were not that strong.

I think it might be doable if you have rock solid ties but I definitely wouldn't feel comfortable counting on it. Definitely give serious consideration to other safer markets like NY. You should be able to bid all of the SF firms that come to EIP and also be able to bid a considerable number of safer NY firms.

I have okay ties. Born and raised in SoCal but all my relatives in SF/SV and through an extension of that, I have a place I can stay in the city on my own free of charge (part of the reason for the SF preference). If I can ask, what are all the SF firms that come to EIP, or rather, are there any notables that don't?

I'll definitely bid on those NY firms too though, thanks. I appreciate that.

You have a much better shot at SV transactional than SF transactional (and I personally think SV transactional tends to be more interesting). If you really want the Bay Area I'd gun for SV firms, but do agree having NYC as a backup is your safest bet.

Understood, thanks. I'm definitely open to the possibility. What sort of transactional work do the SF firms tend to deal with relative to the SV ones?

[hiima3L]

I looked hard at places like Farella Braun, Keker, Cotchett Pitre, Howard Rice, (which doesn't exist anymore, now it's A&P's SF office), andMcManis Faulkner (San Jose).


- BW's Beard.

-Cotchett Pitre is a plaintiffs firm, unlike the two above, and is located on the Peninsula, not in SF. Supposed to be a great place, though.

Really?

I've heard nothing but horrible, horrible things about it. I know of someone who quit without notice because it was so bad.

[Anonymous User]

Thank you for the thread. I am bottom 10% @ DCNG, strong ties to LA/SV/SF/Sac. Do you have any suggestions for mid-size or regional firms who might be interested in me despite my GPA?

IIRC, Berkeley had a list of midsize/small firms that had hired Boalt grads in the past. You might be able to find it on the Berkeley Law website.

Best of luck!

I'm interested in this as well.

[bravos89]

I think it might be a big tough. I was low Stone looking for SF transactional and had a pretty hard time in SF but my ties were not that strong.

I think it might be doable if you have rock solid ties but I definitely wouldn't feel comfortable counting on it. Definitely give serious consideration to other safer markets like NY. You should be able to bid all of the SF firms that come to EIP and also be able to bid a considerable number of safer NY firms.

I have okay ties. Born and raised in SoCal but all my relatives in SF/SV and through an extension of that, I have a place I can stay in the city on my own free of charge (part of the reason for the SF preference). If I can ask, what are all the SF firms that come to EIP, or rather, are there any notables that don't?

I'll definitely bid on those NY firms too though, thanks. I appreciate that.

You have a much better shot at SV transactional than SF transactional (and I personally think SV transactional tends to be more interesting). If you really want the Bay Area I'd gun for SV firms, but do agree having NYC as a backup is your safest bet.

Understood, thanks. I'm definitely open to the possibility. What sort of transactional work do the SF firms tend to deal with relative to the SV ones?

All of the major SF offices come to EIP. Farella Braun doesn't but they're more of a mid-market shop so I'm not sure how interested you would be in them for transactional stuff but they seem pretty well respected in the Bay Area.

To be honest, I found that the SF transactional market to be pretty meager as a whole. A lot of firms seem to have shrunk their corporate practices in SF and moved them to SV. The two offices that hire a considerable (>10) number of summers and seem to have robust transactional practices are MoFo and Kirkland. MoFo has a more diverse practice while Kirkland focuses on PE work if you're into that stuff. I would look at Orrick as well for transactional practice in SF.

If you're interested in emerging company/VC work, definitely focus on SV as a couple of those firms have pretty robust summer programs. A notable firm that doesn't come to EIP is Fenwick so I would reach out to them and express interest.

[Anonymous User]

Top 25% at Berkeley. Want to do commercial lit. in SF.

Bids to: MoFo, Latham, OMM, Jones Day, Bingham, Fenwick, Orrick, Sidley, DLA Piper, Baker, Keker, White&Case, Morgan Lewis, Ropes, Farella, Wilson Sonsini, Covington, Skadden, Cooley

Forgetting any major players/shooting too high?