NYU EIW 2021 Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

Rising 3L. Need more info to contextualize your results. Which market(s) did you bid on primarily? Lit vs. corp? Latham NY and its ilk should be a slam dunk for you, especially if you lean towards corp. Bid exclusively DC and wanted only lit/reg? That's another proposition altogether. The latter route produces a chance of strikeout for anyone, although you should still get something based on your grades/LR.

Half DC, half NY. Gave the whole "leaning litigation, but open to corporate" speech as adviced by OCS. My bid list was atrociously optimistic though. 21 of the firms were 3.6+ and my 4 "safeties" were 3.4-3.6. And among my 3.6+ firms were mega reaches like Wachtell, Susman, Cravath, Williams & Connolly etc... I honestly think you could not construct a more selective list out of the bid selections given if you tried. My list prior to counseling was way more realistic. My mega reach was Cravath with DPW, SullCrom being my reaches and firms like Latham being my targets. OCS told me this was way too conservative and as a result constructed this monster list that I am now embarrassed I thought was a good idea.

Same 3L. S&C, Cravath, and DPW are not (mega) reaches at all. I know people who got them with significantly lower GPAs than you (I assume you have ~3.7 based on "top 10%"). S&C does seem to be focusing more on fit compared to previous years, where they would auto offer someone with your grades. But again, you should still get something. If there's still time, reach out to any 3Ls or attorneys and ask for mock interviews.

Honestly, the bigger impediment right now is not the firms you are targeting (other than the likes of Susman/Wachtell/Williams & Connolly, which require absolute tippy-top grades), but rather the fact that you want to be a litigator. The hiring standards have diverged so much between lit and corp (for some firms) that it's like they are hiring for completely separate summer classes in terms of selectivity.

This is a good point regarding the lit thing. During my callbacks and mass mails do you think it would be better if I instead said I was unsure between Lit and Corporate or even said I was leaning corporate?

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

Rising 3L. Need more info to contextualize your results. Which market(s) did you bid on primarily? Lit vs. corp? Latham NY and its ilk should be a slam dunk for you, especially if you lean towards corp. Bid exclusively DC and wanted only lit/reg? That's another proposition altogether. The latter route produces a chance of strikeout for anyone, although you should still get something based on your grades/LR.

Half DC, half NY. Gave the whole "leaning litigation, but open to corporate" speech as adviced by OCS. My bid list was atrociously optimistic though. 21 of the firms were 3.6+ and my 4 "safeties" were 3.4-3.6. And among my 3.6+ firms were mega reaches like Wachtell, Susman, Cravath, Williams & Connolly etc... I honestly think you could not construct a more selective list out of the bid selections given if you tried. My list prior to counseling was way more realistic. My mega reach was Cravath with DPW, SullCrom being my reaches and firms like Latham being my targets. OCS told me this was way too conservative and as a result constructed this monster list that I am now embarrassed I thought was a good idea.

Same 3L. S&C, Cravath, and DPW are not (mega) reaches at all. I know people who got them with significantly lower GPAs than you (I assume you have ~3.7 based on "top 10%"). S&C does seem to be focusing more on fit compared to previous years, where they would auto offer someone with your grades. But again, you should still get something. If there's still time, reach out to any 3Ls or attorneys and ask for mock interviews.

Honestly, the bigger impediment right now is not the firms you are targeting (other than the likes of Susman/Wachtell/Williams & Connolly, which require absolute tippy-top grades), but rather the fact that you want to be a litigator. The hiring standards have diverged so much between lit and corp (for some firms) that it's like they are hiring for completely separate summer classes in terms of selectivity.

This is a good point regarding the lit thing. During my callbacks and mass mails do you think it would be better if I instead said I was unsure between Lit and Corporate or even said I was leaning corporate?

At one of my interviews, my interviewer told me to say corp if I was undecided b/w the two & my callback rate doubled after I switched. 3/9 before I switched. 5/7 after.

[Anonymous User]

anyone hear back from WSGR ny? only place i haven't seen any movement from.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

I thought it was common wisdom to take OCS's advices with a grain of salt ... they also provide "average GPA" data for firms by calculating the mean of highest and lowest GPA, not even weighted average, or median. All the peer schools have much more accurate data (e.g., CLS offers percentile of stone scholars (~3.4) data for each firm).

Some firms set lower GPA cutoffs but have higher requirements for resume (heavily prefer relevant work experience), and personality fit with the firm.

(same anon). Yeah in hindsight I was way too gullible. It is a good learning experience. Truth is, I think I wanted to believe I was a shoo-in so when OCS told me something to that effect, I was all too quick to believe them and run with it. Having now been humbled by this process, in the future I am going to try to be much better at evaluating advice. To anyone in the future reading this, learn from my mistake and bid on ACTUAL safeties in tandem with your targets and reaches. Just because you have the transcript/journal for a top firm does not mean you should/can only bid on those firms.

I know it's easy to blame OCS but respectfully, you're probably not good at interviewing as you think you are. In fact, I think it's safe to say you are actually bad if you can't covert when top 10% (plus law review) from NYU.

Instead of looking to shift blame, take ownership and work on your interviewing ASAP to convert the few CBs you do have.

Sorry for the confusion. I did not mean to blame OCS. Rather, my point was I think there is something seriously wrong with my interviewing and or application and OCS keeps telling me there is not, which is very frustrating. I guess to sum it up in a weird way I am blaming OCS for not letting me take ownership. I want to improve, but it feels like I am talking to a brick wall when every counselor says I don't need to improve. Hopefully that makes sense. I understand why it can come off the way you stated, but I want to make clear I am 100% taking full responsibility for my performance. I am cognizant that this can come off as whiny/complainy and give the impression I feel I am "owed" a job, which I do not believe for the record.

I am in almost the same situation as you so maybe we should just sit tight and wait for the ghosting to end.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

I thought it was common wisdom to take OCS's advices with a grain of salt ... they also provide "average GPA" data for firms by calculating the mean of highest and lowest GPA, not even weighted average, or median. All the peer schools have much more accurate data (e.g., CLS offers percentile of stone scholars (~3.4) data for each firm).

Some firms set lower GPA cutoffs but have higher requirements for resume (heavily prefer relevant work experience), and personality fit with the firm.

(same anon). Yeah in hindsight I was way too gullible. It is a good learning experience. Truth is, I think I wanted to believe I was a shoo-in so when OCS told me something to that effect, I was all too quick to believe them and run with it. Having now been humbled by this process, in the future I am going to try to be much better at evaluating advice. To anyone in the future reading this, learn from my mistake and bid on ACTUAL safeties in tandem with your targets and reaches. Just because you have the transcript/journal for a top firm does not mean you should/can only bid on those firms.

I know it's easy to blame OCS but respectfully, you're probably not good at interviewing as you think you are. In fact, I think it's safe to say you are actually bad if you can't covert when top 10% (plus law review) from NYU.

Instead of looking to shift blame, take ownership and work on your interviewing ASAP to convert the few CBs you do have.

Sorry for the confusion. I did not mean to blame OCS. Rather, my point was I think there is something seriously wrong with my interviewing and or application and OCS keeps telling me there is not, which is very frustrating. I guess to sum it up in a weird way I am blaming OCS for not letting me take ownership. I want to improve, but it feels like I am talking to a brick wall when every counselor says I don't need to improve. Hopefully that makes sense. I understand why it can come off the way you stated, but I want to make clear I am 100% taking full responsibility for my performance. I am cognizant that this can come off as whiny/complainy and give the impression I feel I am "owed" a job, which I do not believe for the record.

...my dude you're still trying to shift blame for your poor performance. It's not due to your bid list and it's not because OCS didn't let you take ownership (whatever that means).

Stop posting here and practice your interviewing. Treat the mock interviews like it's the real thing so you can diagnose what's going on. Hope you manage to turn this around.

[checkmate92]

Anyone get S&C CB but no email?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone get S&C CB but no email?

yep! seems like they'll do one mass email

[Anonymous User]

Anyone get S&C CB but no email?

No idea if this is helpful, but I got the email without any phone call... maybe they just send these things out unrelated to each other?

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

Rising 3L. Need more info to contextualize your results. Which market(s) did you bid on primarily? Lit vs. corp? Latham NY and its ilk should be a slam dunk for you, especially if you lean towards corp. Bid exclusively DC and wanted only lit/reg? That's another proposition altogether. The latter route produces a chance of strikeout for anyone, although you should still get something based on your grades/LR.

Half DC, half NY. Gave the whole "leaning litigation, but open to corporate" speech as adviced by OCS. My bid list was atrociously optimistic though. 21 of the firms were 3.6+ and my 4 "safeties" were 3.4-3.6. And among my 3.6+ firms were mega reaches like Wachtell, Susman, Cravath, Williams & Connolly etc... I honestly think you could not construct a more selective list out of the bid selections given if you tried. My list prior to counseling was way more realistic. My mega reach was Cravath with DPW, SullCrom being my reaches and firms like Latham being my targets. OCS told me this was way too conservative and as a result constructed this monster list that I am now embarrassed I thought was a good idea.

Also just to chime in to say that some firms like Skadden/ Latham (and I think also Gibson) cares more about personality fit and relevant experience than peer firms. I wouldn't call those firms safeties in any sense, I know multiple ppl got offers from DPW/SullCrom even Cravath but not Skadden or Latham. They have their own (somewhat weird) standards lol

[Anonymous User]

Is CSM more selective at NYU than S&C? It's funny bc at CLS, it seems reversed, at least in terms of GPA, so just curious.

[Anonymous User]

To the guy above who is underperforming… I was an EIW interviewer at one of the firms named. Maybe I even interviewed you and liked you. But we were told we couldn’t call back anyone interested in litigation right away because our litigation class was already full from pre-OCI offers. You may hear from us in a few weeks once pre-OCI offers have started to expire.

[Anonymous User]

To the guy above who is underperforming… I was an EIW interviewer at one of the firms named. Maybe I even interviewed you and liked you. But we were told we couldn’t call back anyone interested in litigation right away because our litigation class was already full from pre-OCI offers. You may hear from us in a few weeks once pre-OCI offers have started to expire.

Not NYU but as a lit applicant, oof. This for DC or NY? Or both lol

[Anonymous User]

To the guy above who is underperforming… I was an EIW interviewer at one of the firms named. Maybe I even interviewed you and liked you. But we were told we couldn’t call back anyone interested in litigation right away because our litigation class was already full from pre-OCI offers. You may hear from us in a few weeks once pre-OCI offers have started to expire.

Not NYU but as a lit applicant, oof. This for DC or NY? Or both lol

This is NY.

[Anonymous User]

Is CSM more selective at NYU than S&C? It's funny bc at CLS, it seems reversed, at least in terms of GPA, so just curious.

The way it was framed to me by OCS is SullCrom has a hard gpa minimum that is higher than Cravath, so in that sense they are more competitive. But, as far as pure screener to callback to offer goes Cravath is more selective while still being more likely to take someone with a lower gpa that had good WE + good interview.

[PerpetuallyMiserable]

anyone hear back from WSGR ny? only place i haven't seen any movement from.

I too would like to know about Wilson Sonsini. Also Mayer Brown NYC.

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone frustrated by OCS at all? Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Edit: To add on, I think honestly what happened is that I am not as strong a candidate as OCS led me to believe and I was definitely too gullible/willing to accept their praise. After going through this process, it seems ridiculous that I truly believed Latham, for example, was a "safety" firm. I think what I need to do is start mass mailing those firms that I should have bid on during EIW instead of Cravath & Co.

I thought it was common wisdom to take OCS's advices with a grain of salt ... they also provide "average GPA" data for firms by calculating the mean of highest and lowest GPA, not even weighted average, or median. All the peer schools have much more accurate data (e.g., CLS offers percentile of stone scholars (~3.4) data for each firm).

Some firms set lower GPA cutoffs but have higher requirements for resume (heavily prefer relevant work experience), and personality fit with the firm.

(same anon). Yeah in hindsight I was way too gullible. It is a good learning experience. Truth is, I think I wanted to believe I was a shoo-in so when OCS told me something to that effect, I was all too quick to believe them and run with it. Having now been humbled by this process, in the future I am going to try to be much better at evaluating advice. To anyone in the future reading this, learn from my mistake and bid on ACTUAL safeties in tandem with your targets and reaches. Just because you have the transcript/journal for a top firm does not mean you should/can only bid on those firms.

I know it's easy to blame OCS but respectfully, you're probably not good at interviewing as you think you are. In fact, I think it's safe to say you are actually bad if you can't covert when top 10% (plus law review) from NYU.

Instead of looking to shift blame, take ownership and work on your interviewing ASAP to convert the few CBs you do have.

Sorry for the confusion. I did not mean to blame OCS. Rather, my point was I think there is something seriously wrong with my interviewing and or application and OCS keeps telling me there is not, which is very frustrating. I guess to sum it up in a weird way I am blaming OCS for not letting me take ownership. I want to improve, but it feels like I am talking to a brick wall when every counselor says I don't need to improve. Hopefully that makes sense. I understand why it can come off the way you stated, but I want to make clear I am 100% taking full responsibility for my performance. I am cognizant that this can come off as whiny/complainy and give the impression I feel I am "owed" a job, which I do not believe for the record.

...my dude you're still trying to shift blame for your poor performance. It's not due to your bid list and it's not because OCS didn't let you take ownership (whatever that means).

Stop posting here and practice your interviewing. Treat the mock interviews like it's the real thing so you can diagnose what's going on. Hope you manage to turn this around.

OCS sucks big doo-doo regardless

[LBJ's Hair]

Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Not to be a dick, but with top 10% and law review, if you were actually good at interviewing, you would have a 100% offer (not callback--offer) rate at every every non-WLRK/Susman/Williams & Connolly/Munger firm.

I'm only a few years out of school, and I did. My similarly-situated friends did.

Litigation might have cost you at a firm or two, but you're....2/9 so far. On callbacks, not offers. For someone with your stats, that's absolutely atrocious. The problem is clearly you--you're annoying your interviewers.

Do some practice interviews, tell people your situation, and ask for *candid* feedback.

Again, not saying this to be a dick, or brag about OCS success from years ago. Saying it to point out that like, you're doing something wrong, and you can fix it.

[Anonymous User]

Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Not to be a dick, but with top 10% and law review, if you were actually good at interviewing, you would have a 100% offer (not callback--offer) rate at every every non-WLRK/Susman/Williams & Connolly/Munger firm.

I'm only a few years out of school, and I did. My similarly-situated friends did.

Litigation might have cost you at a firm or two, but you're....2/9 so far. On callbacks, not offers. For someone with your stats, that's absolutely atrocious. The problem is clearly you--you're annoying your interviewers.

Do some practice interviews, tell people your situation, and ask for *candid* feedback.

Again, not saying this to be a dick, or brag about OCS success from years ago. Saying it to point out that like, you're doing something wrong, and you can fix it.

Same anon. You're totally right — I've talked to friends and it is my interviewing. Essentially, I don't come off as formal/professional. I use "umm" a lot and have a tendency to meander. This in tandem with my resume that has WE, but lacks formal WE (think tutor/political campaign work) probably made interviewers not see me as someone they could imagine working in a law firm. Feels good to have identified a problem, though, at least I have a tangible thing to improve upon. Both the firms I have CBs on are great firms I would be happy at so going to put my disappointment aside and try to nail it. They're both firms that OCS has designated as 3.6+ so I know it will be challenging but doable. Will update this thread if I get one should anyone care. Appreciate the tough love ya'll.

[moxcoal]

Going into EIW they told me I had nothing to worry about except sifting through my double-digit offers as I was a strong interviewer and had top 10% gpa and Law Review. They even encouraged me to be less "safe" with my bidlist and bid on more selective firms. Ok, so that advice is not necessarily bad in aggregate, but now I am sitting at 2 callbacks, 7 rejections, and 16 ghosts from EIW. Meanwhile, OCS is still acting like I am in a good spot. I talked to them and they told me I was just "unlucky" this round and will certainly have tons of more callbacks piling up as well as a 80-90% callback to offer rate. I just... don't buy it. I think something is seriously wrong with my interviewing skills or application and OCS seems to think I am in a perfect position when clearly I am not. Given a 2/25 screener to offer rate with my grades I feel like I am heading towards a strikeout and OCS is pretending like everything is going great.

Not to be a dick, but with top 10% and law review, if you were actually good at interviewing, you would have a 100% offer (not callback--offer) rate at every every non-WLRK/Susman/Williams & Connolly/Munger firm.

I'm only a few years out of school, and I did. My similarly-situated friends did.

Litigation might have cost you at a firm or two, but you're....2/9 so far. On callbacks, not offers. For someone with your stats, that's absolutely atrocious. The problem is clearly you--you're annoying your interviewers.

Do some practice interviews, tell people your situation, and ask for *candid* feedback.

Again, not saying this to be a dick, or brag about OCS success from years ago. Saying it to point out that like, you're doing something wrong, and you can fix it.

Same anon. You're totally right — I've talked to friends and it is my interviewing. Essentially, I don't come off as formal/professional. I use "umm" a lot and have a tendency to meander. This in tandem with my resume that has WE, but lacks formal WE (think tutor/political campaign work) probably made interviewers not see me as someone they could imagine working in a law firm. Feels good to have identified a problem, though, at least I have a tangible thing to improve upon. Both the firms I have CBs on are great firms I would be happy at so going to put my disappointment aside and try to nail it. They're both firms that OCS has designated as 3.6+ so I know it will be challenging but doable. Will update this thread if I get one should anyone care. Appreciate the tough love ya'll.

You clearly know what’s up and can do this! Good luck out there. People are kinda piling in on you.. but I personally know some high gpa folks who underperformed big time. They’re good ppl. It’s just that interviewing is it’s own animal (not to say it’s some robotic overly-tailored exercise, but you have to be very intentional with what and how you convey information). If this cycle ends up disappointing, you can try to lock in a clerkship soon, lateral, or any number of things down the road with your numbers and the right amount of practice

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone heard from Williams & Connolly?

[Anonymous User]

any ny post cb movement?

[Anonymous User]

Would not having something locked up for the summer be viewed as a negative on apps?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone had cbs with Ropes or K&S NY and heard back?

[etcetera1987]

This form is collecting callback info:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Y6cCd0 ... UHHSQAuAzk

Results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... 3-nDcXbJQ/

Is there a corresponding doc for offers/rejections? I'm sure many of us are at the stage of being a few CBs in and waiting for the phone to ring...

[Anonymous User]

Is there a separate doc for tracking callback outcomes? Should we start doing that here?