Former V15 Senior Associate - Current In-House Taking ?s Forum

[Anonymous User]

thescienceguy wrote:3L here who really wants to go in-house at a tech company some day. Working at a V50 in NYC after graduation in their general corporate group. As far as I know, we don't have any tech clients and I also don't have a tech-related background. How difficult would it be for me to get to where you are now? Should I try to lateral to a firm that does IP transactional/VC/startup work to get relevant industry experience? Thanks in advance!also, to kind of piggyback on this, how helpful would it be to have a tech background to get to where you were/are?

I'm the anon who went in house at a software company right out of school above.

FWIW I don't think I would have gotten the job if I hadn't worked as a software developer and consultant before going to law school. The fact that I can sling Java/C code is irrelevant to the work I am doing now, but it made me stand out. Additionally, I had worked under some of the agreements I am now reviewing as a consultant (professional services agreements, statements of work, etc.).

I imagine background is less important when you have a couple years of experience as an attorney.

[byebyebiglaw]

3L here who really wants to go in-house at a tech company some day. Working at a V50 in NYC after graduation in their general corporate group. As far as I know, we don't have any tech clients and I also don't have a tech-related background. How difficult would it be for me to get to where you are now? Should I try to lateral to a firm that does IP transactional/VC/startup work to get relevant industry experience?

Thanks in advance!

Hard to say, I think if you worked at a firm that did that kind of work it would be easier, but I'm not sure that I can quantify how much easier. If you're at a highly ranked firm now, the name of the firm may open some doors, but you won't be able to make any kind of relationships to make an easy transition. Personally, I would have tried to start out in a firm that works for the type of clients that I'm interested in, but at this point I'd worry about making it through the first couple years at the firm and re-evaluate then. You never know where the next opportunity will come from, maybe it'll be a fried of a colleague or a former classmate, so I'd focus on doing well where you're at for now.

[byebyebiglaw]

3L here who really wants to go in-house at a tech company some day. Working at a V50 in NYC after graduation in their general corporate group. As far as I know, we don't have any tech clients and I also don't have a tech-related background. How difficult would it be for me to get to where you are now? Should I try to lateral to a firm that does IP transactional/VC/startup work to get relevant industry experience?

Thanks in advance!

also, to kind of piggyback on this, how helpful would it be to have a tech background to get to where you were/are?

Sure, it's always helpful to have a background in that area if you want to work in a tech company.

[byebyebiglaw]

How did staying in biglaw for 7 years affect your personal life? To be more specific, around here a lot of people characterize biglaw as being non-stop work where you don't have much room for a personal life. Did you find this was the case?

Also, how many hours a week did you work on average while in biglaw?

It's hard to balance but plenty of people do it, I think after my first couple years I found it a lot easier to balance and have a personal life. It is difficult at times, like never being able to schedule a true vacation or make definitive plans because you never know if you're going to be free. That's part of the reason why I wanted out.

I went from anywhere between 1950 to 2600 hours billed in a year.

Edit: it's hard to give an average, litigation is all ups and downs between 40 and 120 hours a week.

[Big Shrimpin]

Also, how many hours a week did you work on average while in biglaw?

Hours/wk depend upon firm, practice area, group, etc.

I'm in MFH IP lit and weeks vary. Some are slow (bill 20-30), but some are busy as fuck (bill 70-90). DAT bimodal distribution, so in most cases, average hours/week isn't the best metric for judging your weekly workload. To be sure, however, these things vary widely.

I think this is pretty representative of most firms, at least MFH firms. But, fwiw, I know associates in other secondary cities that work just as much.

Edit: didn't see above post, but that has been my observation, too.

[buddyt]

FWIW I don't think I would have gotten the job if I hadn't worked as a software developer and consultant before going to law school. The fact that I can sling Java/C code is irrelevant to the work I am doing now, but it made me stand out. Additionally, I had worked under some of the agreements I am now reviewing as a consultant (professional services agreements, statements of work, etc.).

I imagine background is less important when you have a couple years of experience as an attorney.

Sure, it's always helpful to have a background in that area if you want to work in a tech company.

What constitutes a sufficient background? When I start school in the fall I'll have almost 2 years of WE at a top-tier IT consulting firm doing systems analysis and application development. I don't have a technical degree (Computer Information Systems) so I realize I won't be patent bar eligible, but I can "sling Java/C code" with the best of them (mostly .net actually) and would love to get into IP. At how much of a disadvantage does that put me? Am I being unrealistic?

[Anonymous User]

What constitutes a sufficient background? When I start school in the fall I'll have almost 2 years of WE at a top-tier IT consulting firm doing systems analysis and application development. I don't have a technical degree (Computer Information Systems) so I realize I won't be patent bar eligible, but I can "sling Java/C code" with the best of them (mostly .net actually) and would love to get into IP. At how much of a disadvantage does that put me? Am I being unrealistic?

Anon. from above.

I'm not patent bar eligible and it hasn't made a difference in my work, which is mostly negotiating and approving contracts. We have a separate IP group which manages outside counsel for patent litigation etc.

Its still really unlikely to start in house. If you are just starting at law school and want to work with technology companies I would seek out firms that do that sort of work. Cooley and Wilson Sonsini immediately come to mind, though there are lots of others. Starting at a firm and then transitioning in house is the traditional path.

*edited to fix block quote