Northwestern OCI Forum

[Anonymous User]

3.5 here with Law Review and seven years WE(management) at a Fortune 150. Do I have any shot at DC firms with that GPA (Holland, Mayer, Winston, K&L, & Goodman) or should I just bid NY?

No IP. Working in DC for the summer and my SO and my sister live here; military family so no real ties anywhere except here, to be honest.

[Kikero]

Did you sign up for The Law Consortium? Does NU still have that in addition to OTIP? If so, they have a DC event which overlapped with the last day of OCI last year (and missing the last day is probably NBD for you since all of the NY firms should be done by then). You could bid mostly NY, throw in a few DC firms, and bolster that with a few interviews from TLC. I know generally people tell you not to split between major markets, but DC is small enough and the firms tend to go lower, so you probably can do both NY and DC, as long as you treat NY as your primary market and don't go putting DC firms in your top 5.

[bdubs]

3.5 here with Law Review and seven years WE(management) at a Fortune 150. Do I have any shot at DC firms with that GPA (Holland, Mayer, Winston, K&L, & Goodman) or should I just bid NY?

No IP. Working in DC for the summer and my SO and my sister live here; military family so no real ties anywhere except here, to be honest.

What area of law are you hoping to work in? If your 7 years of mgmt is related to a niche dc type legal area I think you might have better luck. I think bidding all DC is dangerous but you stand a shot anyway with LR+ties

ETA: the consortium suggestion sounds like a good idea

[Anonymous User]

3.5 here with Law Review and seven years WE(management) at a Fortune 150. Do I have any shot at DC firms with that GPA (Holland, Mayer, Winston, K&L, & Goodman) or should I just bid NY?

No IP. Working in DC for the summer and my SO and my sister live here; military family so no real ties anywhere except here, to be honest.

Thanks, that is great advice! Yes, I have 3 interviews coming up at the Law Consortium. Worked primarily in energy prior to school so trying for energy regulatory work, and the partners I've spoken to at 2 firms here say they will go to bat for me if I interview at OCI but have also been (politely) honest about the GPA being a hurdle and to be prepared for it with screeners. Heard a story today where the guy was perfect for the position but with a 3.25 and got passed over for a Harvard 3.99 with no WE so that put a big dent in my confidence. Also targeting Houston outside of OCI as a secondary market, just in case.

[Anonymous User]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

[Micdiddy]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

I think you know that it's very likely you'll miss out on every Chicago firm if you bid them that low. I don't think SF/SV is being bid that highly this year (my Career Adviser said she hasn't heard much talk about it either), so it might be safer to use 1-5 or so for Chicago and then make a run on SF. Of course, I am bidding SF so I could be trying to trick you

[Anonymous User]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

There is no doubt in my mind that you will miss out on nearly all the Chicago firms on your bidlist; the ones you have a shot at are the ones with 80 slots, and even then, it might be difficult.

[bananasplit19]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

I think you know that it's very likely you'll miss out on every Chicago firm if you bid them that low. I don't think SF/SV is being bid that highly this year (my Career Adviser said she hasn't heard much talk about it either), so it might be safer to use 1-5 or so for Chicago and then make a run on SF. Of course, I am bidding SF so I could be trying to trick you

FWIW, 23% of our class is categorized as from the "West" (source: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissi ... ofile.html). Compare this with 29% for Class of 2015 (source: Internet Archive, same site). Obviously it's not a perfect indicator (more Midwest/East Coasters may want to go West this year, for example...plus, only two data points ), but potentially promising for us California folk.

[LRGhost]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

I think you know that it's very likely you'll miss out on every Chicago firm if you bid them that low. I don't think SF/SV is being bid that highly this year (my Career Adviser said she hasn't heard much talk about it either), so it might be safer to use 1-5 or so for Chicago and then make a run on SF. Of course, I am bidding SF so I could be trying to trick you

FWIW, 23% of our class is categorized as from the "West" (source: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissi ... ofile.html). Compare this with 29% for Class of 2015 (source: Internet Archive, same site). Obviously it's not a perfect indicator (more Midwest/East Coasters may want to go West this year, for example...plus, only two data points ), but potentially promising for us California folk.

Could have sworn we had more enrolled students.

[bananasplit19]

3.5x, LR, NorCal ties. Shooting for SF/SV, really don't want NY. Is it bad to top-load my bidlist (slots 1-15) with almost entirely CA firms (with a couple of token Chicago firms), and fill in the rest of my list with Chicago firms? My worry is I'll miss out on Chicago firms altogether by bidding them so low, but I also don't want to tempt fate by dropping CA firms any lower.

I think you know that it's very likely you'll miss out on every Chicago firm if you bid them that low. I don't think SF/SV is being bid that highly this year (my Career Adviser said she hasn't heard much talk about it either), so it might be safer to use 1-5 or so for Chicago and then make a run on SF. Of course, I am bidding SF so I could be trying to trick you

FWIW, 23% of our class is categorized as from the "West" (source: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/admissi ... ofile.html). Compare this with 29% for Class of 2015 (source: Internet Archive, same site). Obviously it's not a perfect indicator (more Midwest/East Coasters may want to go West this year, for example...plus, only two data points ), but potentially promising for us California folk.

Could have sworn we had more enrolled students.

Only counting 3-year JDs (so no AJDs or JD-MBAs). Also, it might be accounting for the Section 1 exodus right before fall finals.

[bdubs]

3.5 here with Law Review and seven years WE(management) at a Fortune 150. Do I have any shot at DC firms with that GPA (Holland, Mayer, Winston, K&L, & Goodman) or should I just bid NY?

No IP. Working in DC for the summer and my SO and my sister live here; military family so no real ties anywhere except here, to be honest.

Thanks, that is great advice! Yes, I have 3 interviews coming up at the Law Consortium. Worked primarily in energy prior to school so trying for energy regulatory work, and the partners I've spoken to at 2 firms here say they will go to bat for me if I interview at OCI but have also been (politely) honest about the GPA being a hurdle and to be prepared for it with screeners. Heard a story today where the guy was perfect for the position but with a 3.25 and got passed over for a Harvard 3.99 with no WE so that put a big dent in my confidence. Also targeting Houston outside of OCI as a secondary market, just in case.

I think your energy law focus with Houston as a secondary is pretty legit. Target firms that have big practices in that area centered in DC. The firms you are targeting will be hard because they have pretty small classes in DC (all below 10 except MB). Throw in a few with larger classes and a couple that are small but energy focused.

3.25 is below median at pretty much any school that will interview people in DC, not surprising that guy got passed over. I wouldn't let that discourage you too much.

[cookiejar1]

Just a FYI - Looks like some firms have shuffled interview slots. I don't know which firms did but go ahead and double check. Allen & Overy, for example, now has 20 interview slots (as opposed to 11 before). Skadden now has slots per office (before it was 120 for all).

[Anonymous User]

Alum here. Doesn't seem like you'll get Dechert, Proskauer. Shearman might be on the cusp as well. I might be wrong, but I seem to remember that your GPA would not be in contention for the more grade-selective Debevoise.

edit: Looking at the two NU alums working in Debevoise's NY office, it seems that they were pretty credentialed. One was EIC of law review + magna + coif, and the other was law review + coif.

Deb is less selective than some other firms on this list. Those others being Kirkland PW stb and maybe skadden.

Alum here. This does not reflect the prevailing opinion, especially since KE is Ny on that list; I distinctly recall multiple years' OCI stats being relatively low for KE NY. I also know multiple people who got Simpson who were at OP's GPA or lower. And skadden's reputation is that it is The V5 that dips GPA-wise (not saying that a 3.45 is competitive, just that skadden is not the right example to cite here). Sorry if this comes off as harsh, I'm really not trying to be... this poster seems uninformed about NY interviewing.

I'm saying deb isn't as selective as people were making them out to be. I think if you're going to caution against deb because of GPA, you should caution against the others, too. If he has a shot at skadden/PW/K&E/stb, then he certainly has a shot at deb.

I know people in recruiting at deb so I don't really care whether or not you think I'm informed.

This is a difficult position to take, IMO. Because OP is in clear contention for some of those other firms (namely KE NY), and you are saying that deb is less selective. It seems that you are suggesting that you have firsthand information about callback cutoffs at deb, and I am skeptical that you would be privy to that information (feel free to clear the air if you actually do). But in the face of the CB data that we have, and what we can find on deb's website, I don't see why OP should be optimistic at all about deb. Lastly, careers personally identified to me that deb is a "grade selective firm" when I was recruiting and asking questions about the relationship bw vault and selectivity in NY.

[milkisforbabies]

So, since we're unlikely to get many (any?) of our bids past 20/25, is there any reason to order those bids in any specific way?

And does anyone have much luck getting extra interviews by directly contacting the firms they missed during bidding: "I bid on your firm but didn't receive an interview..." My CSO mentioned that a number of people have been successful doing that, but I thought people primarily got firms they under-bid on through cancellations or schmoozing during breaks.

[LRGhost]

So, since we're unlikely to get many (any?) of our bids past 20/25, is there any reason to order those bids in any specific way?

And does anyone have much luck getting extra interviews by directly contacting the firms they missed during bidding: "I bid on your firm but didn't receive an interview..." My CSO mentioned that a number of people have been successful doing that, but I thought people primarily got firms they under-bid on through cancellations or schmoozing during breaks.

Along the same line, is it common to talk to someone in a hospitality suite and have it be a de facto screener? Would you talk to someone and at the end of the conversation hand them your resume and mention you didn't get a formal screener slot and ask if they may have time for quieter discussion at some point?

[Kikero]

And does anyone have much luck getting extra interviews by directly contacting the firms they missed during bidding: "I bid on your firm but didn't receive an interview..." My CSO mentioned that a number of people have been successful doing that, but I thought people primarily got firms they under-bid on through cancellations or schmoozing during breaks.

I got a phone interview which turned into a callback from doing that. I had an informational interview with that same firm about 6 months previously though, so I had already expressed interest a while back and I feel like that made it a little easier.

[Anonymous User]

This is a difficult position to take, IMO. Because OP is in clear contention for some of those other firms (namely KE NY), and you are saying that deb is less selective. It seems that you are suggesting that you have firsthand information about callback cutoffs at deb, and I am skeptical that you would be privy to that information (feel free to clear the air if you actually do). But in the face of the CB data that we have, and what we can find on deb's website, I don't see why OP should be optimistic at all about deb. Lastly, careers personally identified to me that deb is a "grade selective firm" when I was recruiting and asking questions about the relationship bw vault and selectivity in NY.

Let me try to clear this up so we can stop cluttering. I know that Deb's cutoff is equal to or less selective than the firms I mentioned, except I said maybe with Skadden because I'm not sure about that one. By less selective, I mean the grade cutoff. Willingness to dip below that is, in my eyes, different. Perhaps you disagree, but I think that's where the disconnect is regardless.

Please don't be so aggressive to people trying to share information. I didn't take offense but I think it's likely to deter people from doing so in the future.

[09042014]

Cut offs aren't a good way to model recruiting. The lowest someone is willing to take doesn't mean they don't highly prefer good grades. And a higher cut off doesn't mean that that grades the another firms biggest factor.

[Anonymous User]

Please don't be so aggressive to people trying to share information. I didn't take offense but I think it's likely to deter people from doing so in the future.

My bad on that -- really just trying to give the viewers information, and some of it can come off negatively. My apologies once more.

[Anonymous User]

Please don't be so aggressive to people trying to share information. I didn't take offense but I think it's likely to deter people from doing so in the future.

My bad on that -- really just trying to give the viewers information, and some of it can come off negatively. My apologies once more.

I appreciate it. Sorry about the confusion -- we both have the same goal here

[Micdiddy]

Would be hilarious if the same person made both above posts.
Anyway, DF is right. Cutoffs are just that, a cutoff. The median of GPA's actually hired is much more important to determine firm selectivity.

[Anonymous User]

Let me try to clear this up so we can stop cluttering. I know that Deb's cutoff is equal to or less selective than the firms I mentioned, except I said maybe with Skadden because I'm not sure about that one. By less selective, I mean the grade cutoff. Willingness to dip below that is, in my eyes, different. Perhaps you disagree, but I think that's where the disconnect is regardless.

Please don't be so aggressive to people trying to share information. I didn't take offense but I think it's likely to deter people from doing so in the future.

Question (and sorry if this was already discussed above and I missed it) but what are we thinking the Deb cutoff and/or median is?

[Anonymous User]

Would be hilarious if the same person made both above posts.
Anyway, DF is right. Cutoffs are just that, a cutoff. The median of GPA's actually hired is much more important to determine firm selectivity.

Where can we get median gpa's of those hired?

[Anonymous User]

It seems like there's only 2 NU grads at Gibson Dunn NYC. Is this self selection or does Gibson not like to hire from NU as much?

[bdubs]

It seems like there's only 2 NU grads at Gibson Dunn NYC. Is this self selection or does Gibson not like to hire from NU as much?

GDC didn't come to NU OCI for a long time. When I asked my CSO they said they had hired students in the past but it was entirely based on resume drop/mass mail. So it's not overly surprising that there are few NU people at GDC, particularly in NYC.