NU OCI 2013/The Great Jerb Hunt Forum

[chill]

.

[lgleye]

.

[bk1]

They will still care about interest in the firm for screeners. Maybe less so because it's a screener and it's short, but it is still important.

[IAFG]

People always say it's just a personality check. It's probably true if your grades are a slam dunk. If they aren't, you're just another 3.X who isn't a sociopath.

I don't think it's a good idea to go into OCI hoping that one of the Prince Charmings is going to think you're just so pretty and sweet tempered and a good dancer that he is going to give you a CB because you got through the screener without saying anything weird. If you have great grades, a great background, etc then your pitch is easier. If you don't, what do you think is going to happen in that screener to get you an offer?

[D-hops]

The more specific you can be, the better. If you can tie your talents, experiences, or desires to the firm in specific ways that is better than general ties. For example, saying you want to do Capital Markets work at DPW is better than saying you want to do transactional work, and it shows that you know that DPW has a very strong capital markets group. It isn't necessary to be that specific, but to the extent you can, it will improve your chances.

[terriers]

The more specific you can be, the better. If you can tie your talents, experiences, or desires to the firm in specific ways that is better than general ties. For example, saying you want to do Capital Markets work at DPW is better than saying you want to do transactional work, and it shows that you know that DPW has a very strong capital markets group. It isn't necessary to be that specific, but to the extent you can, it will improve your chances.

Definitely and you could talk about private equity for Simpson and etc. I guess my question is if they turn around and say "why capital markets?" or "why private equity?" or whatever, I don't want to end up looking like an idiot (more so than usual at least) because I don't have any experience in either one. Is that a case where it's just a good idea to do a little Googling/research so that you have answers prepared? I feel like you'd also want to avoid compartmentalizing yourself in a screener into one specific practice area. So maybe bring up a practice area that you know the firm is strong in (i.e., hey, I did my research!), but then talk about how at this point in your career, you're still relatively flexible.

[IAFG]

The more specific you can be, the better. If you can tie your talents, experiences, or desires to the firm in specific ways that is better than general ties. For example, saying you want to do Capital Markets work at DPW is better than saying you want to do transactional work, and it shows that you know that DPW has a very strong capital markets group. It isn't necessary to be that specific, but to the extent you can, it will improve your chances.

Definitely and you could talk about private equity for Simpson and etc. I guess my question is if they turn around and say "why capital markets?" or "why private equity?" or whatever, I don't want to end up looking like an idiot because I don't have any experience in either one. Is that a case where it's just a good idea to do a little Googling/research so that you have answers prepared? I feel like you'd also want to avoid compartmentalizing yourself in a screener into one specific practice area. So maybe bring up a practice area that you know the firm is strong in (i.e., hey, I did my research!), but then talk about how at this point in your career, you're still relatively flexible.

IMO, you shouldn't be waiting for them to ask why. You're there to sell yourself. That is your opportunity to explain your "because," not the time to wait to see how little you can get away with.

[bdubs]

The more specific you can be, the better. If you can tie your talents, experiences, or desires to the firm in specific ways that is better than general ties. For example, saying you want to do Capital Markets work at DPW is better than saying you want to do transactional work, and it shows that you know that DPW has a very strong capital markets group. It isn't necessary to be that specific, but to the extent you can, it will improve your chances.

Definitely and you could talk about private equity for Simpson and etc. I guess my question is if they turn around and say "why capital markets?" or "why private equity?" or whatever, I don't want to end up looking like an idiot because I don't have any experience in either one. Is that a case where it's just a good idea to do a little Googling/research so that you have answers prepared? I feel like you'd also want to avoid compartmentalizing yourself in a screener into one specific practice area. So maybe bring up a practice area that you know the firm is strong in (i.e., hey, I did my research!), but then talk about how at this point in your career, you're still relatively flexible.

IMO, you shouldn't be waiting for them to ask why. You're there to sell yourself. That is your opportunity to explain your "because," not the time to wait to see how little you can get away with.

Agree with IAFG about timing.

Also, I think it's a mistake to only bring up a firm's "strong" practice areas. Everyone goes to Simpson and Kirkland saying something about PE for example, but they have lots of other practice areas where they need to hire associates. You can say it's one reason that brought you to the firm, but they hear that from almost everyone they interview so you're not differentiating yourself. If you can you should try to find a non-generic "fit" with the firm.

[lgleye]

.

[IAFG]

It's not that you should be gung ho on a certain practice area. It's that, which you say you're leaning to a practice area, you should be able to talk about it non-ignorantly and be able to give concrete reasons why you would be a super awesome associate in that area.

E.G. I am leaning toward litigation, because I spent two years working at an insurance company, and I got to spend some time working with their defense counsel. My work at the insurance company involved a lot of the same sorts of critical thinking and using research to inform decisions. I've gotten a chance to talk to a few large firm litigators, and I think my skills will translate to the kind of work they've described to me, particularly [stuff]. Also, I'm going to be working in the Investor Protection clinic next semester, which I think will help me keep improving on that skillset.

Not just, "yeah, I am leaning toward litigation, since I liked CLR."

[D-hops]

It's not that you should be gung ho on a certain practice area. It's that, which you say you're leaning to a practice area, you should be able to talk about it non-ignorantly and be able to give concrete reasons why you would be a super awesome associate in that area.

E.G. I am leaning toward litigation, because I spent two years working at an insurance company, and I got to spend some time working with their defense counsel. My work at the insurance company involved a lot of the same sorts of critical thinking and using research to inform decisions. I've gotten a chance to talk to a few large firm litigators, and I think my skills will translate to the kind of work they've described to me, particularly [stuff]. Also, I'm going to be working in the Investor Protection clinic next semester, which I think will help me keep improving on that skillset.

Not just, "yeah, I am leaning toward litigation, since I liked CLR."

I would auto-ding this person for liking CLR.

[IAFG]

I would auto-ding this person for liking CLR.

I would be very suspect of anyone who TA'd for CLR.

[Anonymous User]

3.7x, interested in Chicago litigation. First draft, does this look at all reasonable?

1. Sidley
2. Kirkland
3. Mayer Brown
4. Jenner & Block
5. Schiff Hardin
6. McDermott
7. Jones Day
8. DLA Piper
9. Latham and Watkins
10. K&L Gates
11. Katten Muchin Rosenman
12. Vedder Price
13. Foley & Lardner
14. Drinker Biddle
15. Dentons
16. Bryan Cave
17. Reed Smith
18. Baker & McKenzie
19. Winston & Strawn
20+ Regional markets I have pretty strong ties to (2 different markets)

[Anonymous User]

Very clueless TT transfer (top 15%) desperately seeking help with bidlist! Willing to live in SF/SV (strong ties), Chicago (no ties except law school, but I did bring my significant other here who now has a job and doesn't want to leave so maybe that counts for something?), NYC, and SD (moderate ties), in that order. But, really, I'm just bidding for a job and don't really care which of those cities it's in. Please help.

Sidley is a super reach, I realize this, but it's my dream firm and I know it'll go #1 or #2 so I'm gonna try anyway (unless it's just too stupid?). The final 5 bids are super, super reach firms, but I figure those bids won't get me anything anyway so what the hell.

Is this bidlist at all reasonable? Help appreciated!


1) Sidley Austin (Chicago)
2) Cahill Gordon (NYC)
3) Drinker Biddle (NYC)
4) Chadbourne & Parke (NYC)
5) Chapman & Cutler (Chicago)
6) Goodwin Procter (SF, SV)
7) Pircher Nichols (Chicago)
8 ) Dykema Gossett (Chicago)
9) Drinker Biddle (Chicago)
10) Cooley (NYC, SV, SD, SF)
11) Fenwick & West (SV, SF)
12) Edelson McGuire (Chicago)
13) Gunderson Dettmer (NYC, SV)
14) Faegre Baker (Chicago)
15) K&L Gates (Chicago)
16) Kaye Scholer (NYC)
17) Linklaters (NYC)
18) Milbank Tweed (NYC)
19) Proskauer Rose (Chicago)
20) Proskauer Rose (NYC)
21) Quarles & Brady (Chicago)
22) Sidley (SV)
23) Vedder Price (Chicago)
24) Vinson & Elkins (NYC)
25) White & Case (NYC)
26) Edwards Wildman (Chicago)
27) Thompson Coburn (Chicago)
28) Wilson Sonsini (NYC, SV, SD, SF)
29) Allen & Overy (NYC)
30) clifford chance (NYC)
31) Katten Muchin (Chicago)
32) Locke Lord (Chicago)
33) Polsinelli (Chicago)
34) Schiff Harden (Chicago, NYC, SF)
35) Fried Frank (NYC)
36) Baker & McKenzie (Chicago)
37) Dechert (Chicago)
38) Dentons (Chicago)
39) Mayer Brown (SV)
40) Perkins Coie (SV, SF)
41) Pillsbury Winthrop (SV, SF)
42) Seward & Kissel (NYC)
43) Sheppard Mullin (Chicago)
44) Bates Carey (Chicago)
45) Donohue Brown (Chicago)
46) Latham (SV, SF)
47) Latham (SD)
48) Jones Day (SD, SF, SV)
49) Weil (SV)
50) McDermott Will (Chicago)

[Anonymous User]

3.5 GPA targeting Chicago (I'm also doing a lot of mass mailing to smaller markets, but I don't want NY and have no CA ties so I didn't see the point in bidding any other major markets). I realize you can't give real specific advice about bidlists, but anyone mind letting me know if I've seriously fucked up anything here? I've got this submitted right now, but I thought I'd check with TLS before the deadline in case I need to make any major changes.

Top 30 (after that it's mostly regional):

1. Sidley
2. K&L Gates
3. Katten
4. Kirkland
5. mcguirewoods
6. Baker & McKenzie
7. DLA Piper
8. Dentons
9. Drinker Biddle
10. Vedder Price
11. Chapman
12. Pircher Nichols
13. Foley & Lardner
14. Paul Hastings
15. Proskauer
16. Dykema
17. Dechert
18. Bryan Cave
19. Faegre Baker Daniels
20. X Secondary Market Regional Firm X
21. Edwards Wildman
22. goldberg kohn
23. McDermott Will & Emery
24. Husch Blackwell
25. Mayer Brown
26. Locke Lord
27. Polsinelli
28. Edelson McGuire
29. Thompson Coburn
30. Bates Carey Nicolaides

Also, a Symplicity question: When a firm has multiple locations and it asks you to rank them, do you need to rank them all or can you leave ones you are totally uninterested in blank? I assume you can leave them blank, but I wouldn't want the system thinking my blank was a 0 or something and then tell the firm I'm more interested in Indianapolis or something instead of Chicago.

Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

If anyone has any insight on how to structure my bidlist, don't be shy

3.45, secondary journal, targeting NY/SF+SV; this is how I've got the first 20 or so ranked.

I revised this a little, just want to be sure I don't have any glaring errors/omissions. I was a little lost but tried to organize in accordance with class sizes and callback medians... do you guys think anyone in particular needs to be moved up/down? Thank you in advance for any help, I appreciate it.


Wilson
Fenwick
Proskauer NY
Kaye Scholer NY
Cahill Gordon NY
Milbank NY
CooleySF
Fried Frank NY
Chadbourne & Parke NY
Gunderson
White & Case NY
Shearman & Sterling NY
Linklaters NY
Dechert NY
Wilkie Farr NY
Omelveny SF/SV
Weil Gotshal NY
Alston & Bird NY
Cadwalader NY
Pillsbury Palo Alto
Freshfields NY
Allen & Overy NY
Paul Hastings NY
Goodwin Procter SF

[bk1]

Very clueless TT transfer (top 15%) desperately seeking help with bidlist! Willing to live in SF/SV (strong ties), Chicago (no ties except law school, but I did bring my significant other here who now has a job and doesn't want to leave so maybe that counts for something?), NYC, and SD (moderate ties), in that order. But, really, I'm just bidding for a job and don't really care which of those cities it's in. Please help.

Sidley is a super reach, I realize this, but it's my dream firm and I know it'll go #1 or #2 so I'm gonna try anyway (unless it's just too stupid?). The final 5 bids are super, super reach firms, but I figure those bids won't get me anything anyway so what the hell.

Is this bidlist at all reasonable? Help appreciated!

Top 15% from a TT seems risky to me bidding all over the place. I'd pick one or two markets and focus on those, at least one being NYC. Heck, I'd consider going all in on NYC.

Also: having a dream firm is a bad idea. If Sidley is unlikely for you (and I suspect it is) then don't waste prime bid real estate on it.

[Anonymous User]

I posted a few pages ago but have reworked considerably since then and was wondering what people thought.
3.4x, secondary journal, good work experience, targeting LA and Chicago, mostly interested in transactional and real estate work:

1 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP LA
2 proskauer rose llp LA
3 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP LA
4 PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP LA
5 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Chicago
6 BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP Chicago
7 PAUL HASTINGS LA
8 MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP Chicago
9 schiff hardin llp Chicago
10 LATHAM & WATKINS LLP Chicago
11 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP Chicago
12 SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER & FLOM LLP Chicago
13 mayer brown llp Chicago
14 dykema gossett pllc Chicago
15 PIRCHER NICHOLS & MEEKS Chicago
16 goodwin procter llp LA
17 VEDDER PRICE KAUFMAN & KAMMHOLZ PC Chicago
18 DLA PIPER LLP Chicago
19 JONES DAY LA
20 LOCKE LORD BISSELL & LIDDELL LLP Chicago
21 HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP LA
22 PERKINS COIE LLP Santa Monica
23 BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP LA
24 SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER & FLOM LLP LA
25 mayer brown llp LA

[Anonymous User]

I'm in the AJD program, targeting Houston (w/ ties) & ties to KC. Only have one grade, will PM someone who can help, but not posting here because I'm super easily outted with this. Help!! Blind bidding is awful.

I want to do lit, market preference is Houston -> Texas (no ties to cities other than Houston) -> Chi -> KC

I bid Houston firms w/ other major markets pretty early because if I don't have interviews there it would be awful. I'd be willing to cut early Chi firms to guarantee interviews with those firms.

My bid list:

1. Jenner & Block
2. Skadden
3. DLA Piper
4. K&L Gates
5. Katten
6. Mayer Brown
7. Kirkland & Ellis
8. Locke Lord (Houston - Chi MM)
9. Baker & Hostetler (Houston – NY&DC other major markets)
10. Pillsbury (Houston – NY, DC, CA major markets)
11. Vinson & Elkins LLP (Houston – NY & DC major markets)
12. Paul Hastings (Houston - ATL & DC Major Markets)
13. Jones Day (Houston – ATL & DC Major markets)
14. Gibson Dunn & Crutcher (Dallas – NY, DC & CA major markets)
15. Latham Watkins (Houston only, 9 slots)
16. Wilson Sonsini (Austin – NY , DC & CA MM)
17. Dechert LLP (Austin – DC MM)
18. Bryan Cave (KC - NY, DC & Chi MM)
19. Polsinelli (KC – Chi MM)
20. Baker Botts (TX only)
21. Barack Ferrazzano
22. McDermott
23. Dechert LLP
24. Dentons
25. goldberg kohn
26. Drinker Biddle
27. Proskauer
28. McGuierwoods LLP
29. Perkins Coie
30. Lathrop Gage (KC)
Then alphabetical through other Chi firms.

[Bumi]

3.7x, interested in Chicago litigation. First draft, does this look at all reasonable?

1. Sidley
2. Kirkland
3. Mayer Brown
4. Jenner & Block
5. Schiff Hardin
6. McDermott
7. Jones Day
8. DLA Piper
9. Latham and Watkins
10. K&L Gates
11. Katten Muchin Rosenman
12. Vedder Price
13. Foley & Lardner
14. Drinker Biddle
15. Dentons
16. Bryan Cave
17. Reed Smith
18. Baker & McKenzie
19. Winston & Strawn
20+ Regional markets I have pretty strong ties to (2 different markets)

This is very similar to my bid list last year. PM me if you want the details. It's not bad - you've got great firms with big classes at the top that you'll be competitive for. You should not expect to get more than a couple Chicago firms after Jones Day, though.

[Anonymous User]

3.5 GPA targeting Chicago (I'm also doing a lot of mass mailing to smaller markets, but I don't want NY and have no CA ties so I didn't see the point in bidding any other major markets).

I got an offer to a California firm and a Texas firm last year outside of OCI. My ties to those states were absolutely zero. But in an interview, I had a persuasive story for why, say, California made perfect sense as a place for me to start my career: the practice areas I pretended to want were there, the industries I pretended to care about were there, and I had actually applied to law school there but didn't get into UCLA or USC chose Northwestern for specific reasons. Both firms honestly didn't give a shit whether I'd even been to their city, and in fact people in both places had the attitude that once I started to live there I couldn't possibly want to leave because it is so amazing there or whatever, so they weren't so worried about ties.

Here's the point. Yes, some firms prefer people with ties. Maybe don't use hail-mary OCI bids on them because you only get a finite number of bids. But as long as you have exhausted your mailing options in other cities, and if you're open to it, there's no reason to ignore California entirely with your non-OCI job search.

[bk1]

3.5 GPA targeting Chicago (I'm also doing a lot of mass mailing to smaller markets, but I don't want NY and have no CA ties so I didn't see the point in bidding any other major markets).

I got an offer to a California firm and a Texas firm last year outside of OCI. My ties to those states were absolutely zero. But in an interview, I had a persuasive story for why, say, California made perfect sense as a place for me to start my career: the practice areas I pretended to want were there, the industries I pretended to care about were there, and I had actually applied to law school there but didn't get into UCLA or USC chose Northwestern for specific reasons. Both firms honestly didn't give a shit whether I'd even been to their city, and in fact people in both places had the attitude that once I started to live there I couldn't possibly want to leave because it is so amazing there or whatever, so they weren't so worried about ties.

Here's the point. Yes, some firms prefer people with ties. Maybe don't use hail-mary OCI bids on them because you only get a finite number of bids. But as long as you have exhausted your mailing options in other cities, and if you're open to it, there's no reason to ignore California entirely with your non-OCI job search.

+1 to all of this.

[Anonymous User]

3.5 GPA targeting Chicago (I'm also doing a lot of mass mailing to smaller markets, but I don't want NY and have no CA ties so I didn't see the point in bidding any other major markets).

I got an offer to a California firm and a Texas firm last year outside of OCI. My ties to those states were absolutely zero. But in an interview, I had a persuasive story for why, say, California made perfect sense as a place for me to start my career: the practice areas I pretended to want were there, the industries I pretended to care about were there, and I had actually applied to law school there but didn't get into UCLA or USC chose Northwestern for specific reasons. Both firms honestly didn't give a shit whether I'd even been to their city, and in fact people in both places had the attitude that once I started to live there I couldn't possibly want to leave because it is so amazing there or whatever, so they weren't so worried about ties.

Here's the point. Yes, some firms prefer people with ties. Maybe don't use hail-mary OCI bids on them because you only get a finite number of bids. But as long as you have exhausted your mailing options in other cities, and if you're open to it, there's no reason to ignore California entirely with your non-OCI job search.

Thanks for the advice. To be clear, I was just talking about OCI bids. I'm actually doing OTIP in CA and have a lot of CA firms still on my list to mail.

[rinkrat19]

So apparently I am not very good at "Why our firm?" questions. HOW creative and not-straight-off-the-website do these have to be? Because I DON'T know anything about firms. I look on NALP, Chambers, the firm website, and I google the firm name with "reputation," "known for," etc. And I still feel like I'm totally making shit up.

In one of my SFIPLA interviews yesterday I blanked, lucked out and accidentally made up some BS that happened to be true and the guy was nodding enthusiastically and corroborating what I was saying (which allowed me to rephrase/repackage something he said and say it back to him in a way that put us in the same cool kid's club of scientist/engineer-y people), and in another I gave two reasons I thought were pretty decent and not just website buzzwords, and the guy just gave me a blank stare and said "...is that all?"

I have answers for "tell me about a challenge you faced" and "tell me about how you resolved a conflict" and "what's your weakness" and a few other questions, but "why firm" continutes to baffle me. I'm wary of talking about "collaborative workplaces" and "work-life" balance" and other things that all firms claim to have.

[bk1]

I have answers for "tell me about a challenge you faced" and "tell me about how you resolved a conflict" and "what's your weakness" and a few other questions, but "why firm" continutes to baffle me.

I've actually found law firm interviews to be more conversational and less behavioral. Of course it is good to be prepared for behavioral questions, but also be prepared for a more relaxed and conversational interview.

As for why firm, make a pitch about the firm, its practice areas, and the location.