Top Law Schools

Hey y'all, time for a another fun pick your destiny poll. When answering the poll, the question you should be asking yourself is: for IP generally, which one of these firms would you choose?

However, I am also interested in hearing people's more specific thoughts. Given an interest solely in IP Litigation, which would you chose? What if you were not sure if you wanted to do prosecution or litigation? What if you knew for sure you wanted to do prosecution?

And yes, I realize the list is a bit random. And no, I don't have offers at all of these (some, but not all). But I am interested in what people have to say about all of them. Just go with it. In fact, if there is a firm who does IP that you also want to talk about, please be my guest.

If you have already voted, do you think you could add some words as to the reasoning behind your decision? It would be nice to hear the why as well, instead of just the what.

I would choose Knobbe based upon how ridiculously low the hours are there.

Anonymous User wrote:I would choose Knobbe based upon how ridiculously low the hours are there.

Even for litigation?

Believe it or not, the OC is probably my least favorite location on that list. DC if I had to pick, but I am pretty flexible.

Still Knobbe.

Finnegan and Fish are TTT's in decline.

rayiner wrote: Finnegan and Fish are TTT's in decline.

I've heard that a lot, but I have never really been able to find any actual evidence of it. Where does this come from?

I've litigated against Fish on several occasions. I have been impressed with their Silicon office, but the Dallas one, not so much.

...

.

Bosque wrote:

rayiner wrote: Finnegan and Fish are TTT's in decline.

I've heard that a lot, but I have never really been able to find any actual evidence of it. Where does this come from?

Mostly because they didn't give me callbacks at PLIP, but also because of the terrible offer rates last summer and layoffs.

.

rayiner wrote:

Bosque wrote:

rayiner wrote: Finnegan and Fish are TTT's in decline.

I've heard that a lot, but I have never really been able to find any actual evidence of it. Where does this come from?

Mostly because they didn't give me callbacks at PLIP, but also because of the terrible offer rates last summer and layoffs.

Don't know about Fish, but Finnegan's was 100% last summer. That sounds pretty good to me.

Bosque wrote:

rayiner wrote:

Bosque wrote:

rayiner wrote: Finnegan and Fish are TTT's in decline.

I've heard that a lot, but I have never really been able to find any actual evidence of it. Where does this come from?

Mostly because they didn't give me callbacks at PLIP, but also because of the terrible offer rates last summer and layoffs.

Don't know about Fish, but Finnegan's was 100% last summer. That sounds pretty good to me.

Finnegan offered 17/30 summers firm-wide in '09, 9/17 in the home DC office.

Fish no-offered its entire class in DC and Atlanta, and all but 1 in each of Boston, Silicon Valley, and New York.

edit: 'ray beat me to it.

rayiner wrote:
Finnegan offered 17/30 summers firm-wide in '09, 9/17 in the home DC office.

Fish no-offered its entire class in DC and Atlanta, and all but 1 in each of Boston, Silicon Valley, and New York.

And Finnegan offered 100% in DC last summer. So I don't really see why the fact that they had one bad-but not catastrophic-year (just like most every other big firm out there) makes them TTT.

I won't argue about Fish though, they are smelling pretty rancid.

EDIT: And to be clear, I am not trying to argue that Finnegan is better or worse than any of the other firms on this list. I just don't understand how one semi-bad year for hiring makes them suddenly TTT.

Since the one-year aberration, for the most part, has happened across the board for firms, I would agree that a 50% offer rate two years ago isn't a dealbreaker. Finnegan was my favorite firm throughout the hiring season, and they were adamant about the 100% offer rate from here on out (barring unforeseen economic meltdown/apocalypse) which was very reassuring. I wouldn't say for a second that makes them TTT, but it does shed some light about the status of the firm going into the downturn and during the downturn. Whether it was an unsustainable hiring plan, lack of work or whatever, it seems they've corrected course and continue to be a great choice firm. I just wish I could've gotten an offer

dood wrote:

amyLAchemist wrote:I would likely pick Knobbe out of those. Very easy to split between lit and pros. If it were Finnegan or Fish in Silicon Valley, that would be a close call. Knobbe pays less, but you work less. Also lower PPP, but easier to make partner. Depends on what you are looking for.

Also, do you have location pref?

but knobbe has a 5 year partnership track and starts approx 30 associates every year. unsustainable growth? IMO by the time u get to partner the PROFITS will be razor thin. though finnegan is not that much better for the opposite reason: only like 2 people made partners in past few years.

I would agree with this. The place seems great, it just does not seem like the kind of place where you are going to make all that much money (comparatively). Plus (although you shouldn't really let this be a deciding factor) I get the impression that Finnegan is a much better place to be from than Knobbe. But that very low chance of making partner is a little depressing.