Top Law Schools

.

How much do you get to use your science/eng background on the job?

i dont have a sci/engg bg, but to answer your question anyway - the people who I do know with sci/engg background get put on the meatier patent aspects of the case (infringement contentions, claim construction). I do mostly contract/licensing angle of pat lit. You become very much "in demand" if you have a tech bg. Also, I've only worked on one case in the last 18 mo., so maybe I'm skewed here.

Does this make sense?

How many hours a week do you work, on minimum, average, and high end?

What are the exit options after you leave big law.

Desert Fox wrote:How many hours a week do you work, on minimum, average, and high end?

What are the exit options after you leave big law.

35-80, depends on whats going on really
exit ops vary, deps on the firm of course.

do you think you can make partner at your current firm? what other exit options beside lateral/make partner? work at a patent troll company?

katisse wrote:i dont have a sci/engg bg

How did you get into the patent litigation area? In my experience, most of the IP firms that are looking for new associates require some kind of an intellectual property background. I would like to get into patent law doing basically the same kind of work that you are, but I also do not have a science or engineering background. I am working in-house for a technology company right now in their intellectual property department and I am getting a certificate in law, science, and technology from my school with a concentration in intellectual property. Are these sufficient credentials to be a strong candidate for a patent litigation associate?

Thank you for answering questions.

Given a choice between the IP group at a big law GP firm, a big IP boutique (Fish, Foley, etc.), and a smaller, single-office IP boutique, which would you prefer?

I'm a 1L SA at a single-office boutique. I'm having a good experience, the firm seems to be in pretty good shape, the pay is good, and partnership prospects are very good. That's all very attractive, but I wonder what I would be missing out on if I passed up an opportunity to go to a prestigious GP firm. I've had people tell me I should go for the most prestigious position I can get. But there seems to be considerable downside in big law world, like higher billable requirements and less long and short-term job security.

englawyer wrote:do you think you can make partner at your current firm? what other exit options beside lateral/make partner? work at a patent troll company?

lateral

studebaker07 wrote:

katisse wrote:i dont have a sci/engg bg

How did you get into the patent litigation area? In my experience, most of the IP firms that are looking for new associates require some kind of an intellectual property background. I would like to get into patent law doing basically the same kind of work that you are, but I also do not have a science or engineering background. I am working in-house for a technology company right now in their intellectual property department and I am getting a certificate in law, science, and technology from my school with a concentration in intellectual property. Are these sufficient credentials to be a strong candidate for a patent litigation associate?

Thank you for answering questions.

depends on the firm, its easier to do pat lit if you have a tech bg - gets your foot in the door. You likely will find it easier to get hired as non-tech person in GP than in boutique.

yeast master wrote:Given a choice between the IP group at a big law GP firm, a big IP boutique (Fish, Foley, etc.), and a smaller, single-office IP boutique, which would you prefer?

I'm a 1L SA at a single-office boutique. I'm having a good experience, the firm seems to be in pretty good shape, the pay is good, and partnership prospects are very good. That's all very attractive, but I wonder what I would be missing out on if I passed up an opportunity to go to a prestigious GP firm. I've had people tell me I should go for the most prestigious position I can get. But there seems to be considerable downside in big law world, like higher billable requirements and less long and short-term job security.

not sure i agree with sticking to wherever you end up your 1L SA for purely economic considerations. If you like it there, stay there, very important to like wh you work with, thats #1

but if you go big law- you will be pretty marketable in a partnership-prospect firm at your 3rd year or so. There's no equivalent concept of "prestige" once you are about a year or two out of law school (its there, but its nowhere near what you find in top law schools), you're eitehr doing good work or not, people don't really care if you made law review or where you went to law school - its all about yoru reputation as a good budding litigator.

There's guys running the show who went to TTTs, they're jjust REALLY good litigators

katisse wrote:

studebaker07 wrote:

katisse wrote:i dont have a sci/engg bg

How did you get into the patent litigation area? In my experience, most of the IP firms that are looking for new associates require some kind of an intellectual property background. I would like to get into patent law doing basically the same kind of work that you are, but I also do not have a science or engineering background. I am working in-house for a technology company right now in their intellectual property department and I am getting a certificate in law, science, and technology from my school with a concentration in intellectual property. Are these sufficient credentials to be a strong candidate for a patent litigation associate?

Thank you for answering questions.

depends on the firm, its easier to do pat lit if you have a tech bg - gets your foot in the door. You likely will find it easier to get hired as non-tech person in GP than in boutique.

As someone at an IP firm what qualifies as a tech background? I have a BS in env. sciences and have worked at a high tech Fortune 100 for the last two years in a non technical role, but from what I read this does not qualify.

Am I correct?

theavrock wrote: As someone at an IP firm what qualifies as a tech background? I have a BS in env. sciences and have worked at a high tech Fortune 100 for the last two years in a non technical role, but from what I read this does not qualify.

Am I correct?

EE, CS, maybe ME, are what gets you staffed easiest. But you dont need anything to work on the licensing side of the litigation, which is often important. Pat lit isnt all tech.

You can do a lot of things at diff stages of lit - tech comes in most forcefully for things like noninf contentions and claim construction. You also come in without the engg myopia - diff approach, that's a value added

diff firms have diff cultures, ip boutiques that are all-engg go up routinely aganist non-tech lit teams, im not sure there's an industry consensus on which litigate better. The tech bg makes it easier to get a gig, I don't think you need it at all to be a successful pat litigator

theavrock wrote:
As someone at an IP firm what qualifies as a tech background? I have a BS in env. sciences and have worked at a high tech Fortune 100 for the last two years in a non technical role, but from what I read this does not qualify.

Am I correct?

Someone with EE will probably be more attractive than you.
Try to get into a firm where they do good patent work, but they're not flooded with tech bg/jds.
best bet = GP firm with good IP group <-- there are a TON of excellent IP groups in big law. I can think of like 15 offices a generalist could target if they wanted to do IP lit - right off the top of my head

You think it's harder to get into a firm whose patent lit is in an area other than your background, like one that has a lot of bio when you were an engineer?

Any advice for IP interviews? Patent fair's coming up, it's almost game time for us 2L techies.

stratocophic wrote:You think it's harder to get into a firm whose patent lit is in an area other than your background, like one that has a lot of bio when you were an engineer?

Any advice for IP interviews? Patent fair's coming up, it's almost game time for us 2L techies.

Excellent point. Very good observation.
Yes. see eg covington @ life sci

varies by region too, lots of bio in ny, san diego, lots of EE work in texas, chicago, SV

Do you feel like taking the patent bar before school would be a help in the job process?

On the same note, do you think that would pigeonhole you into IP or would you still be a good candidate for other practice areas?

d34dluk3 wrote:Do you feel like taking the patent bar before school would be a help in the job process?

On the same note, do you think that would pigeonhole you into IP or would you still be a good candidate for other practice areas?

im not a tech person, not qual'd to take pat bar. But yes, it would pigeonhole you probably. Not sure what other practice areas other than patents you're thinking of where a patent bar would make you a good candidate.

Within litigation, pat bar helps- stuff like reexam etc. I'd recommend it to any tech person. Looks good for the firm. Although i'm not sure pat bar should logically help you get a job. If you're tech bg + good law school record, I don't think the pat bar is going to maek diff. Conversely, if your tech bg + JD record isn't good enough to get a job, I'm not entirely sure pat bar pass will help you get a job. Its a very minor bump, if any, is my point.

I know nothing re prosecution boutiques, they would like that im sure.

katisse wrote: Someone with EE will probably be more attractive than you.
Try to get into a firm where they do good patent work, but they're not flooded with tech bg/jds.
best bet = GP firm with good IP group <-- there are a TON of excellent IP groups in big law. I can think of like 15 offices a generalist could target if they wanted to do IP lit - right off the top of my head

Can you list a few of those offices?

katisse wrote:people don't really care if you made law review or where you went to law school - its all about yoru reputation as a good budding litigator.

You mean people will no longer care that I type fast and used LEEWS, Getting to Maybe, and sheer GRIT to out strive my law school classmates?

*kills self*

LawTalkingGuy wrote:

katisse wrote: Someone with EE will probably be more attractive than you.
Try to get into a firm where they do good patent work, but they're not flooded with tech bg/jds.
best bet = GP firm with good IP group <-- there are a TON of excellent IP groups in big law. I can think of like 15 offices a generalist could target if they wanted to do IP lit - right off the top of my head

Can you list a few of those offices?

i'd refer to chambers, depends on your state/city. kirkland, weil, covington, perkins, mofo, orrick, ropes, alston, paul hastings, paul weiss, skadden, cooley, greenberg traurig, sidley, i mean - they all have really good patent groups in some offices. I'm sure I'm missing like a dozen more.

katisse wrote:

LawTalkingGuy wrote:

katisse wrote: Someone with EE will probably be more attractive than you.
Try to get into a firm where they do good patent work, but they're not flooded with tech bg/jds.
best bet = GP firm with good IP group <-- there are a TON of excellent IP groups in big law. I can think of like 15 offices a generalist could target if they wanted to do IP lit - right off the top of my head

Can you list a few of those offices?

i'd refer to chambers, depends on your state/city. kirkland, weil, covington, perkins, mofo, orrick, ropes, alston, paul hastings, paul weiss, skadden, cooley, greenberg traurig, sidley, i mean - they all have really good patent groups in some offices. I'm sure I'm missing like a dozen more.

egregious greenberg traurig trolling

Julio_El_Chavo wrote:
egregious greenberg traurig trolling

?

If you work in NYC, would you mind giving me a run down of which firms do a significant amount patent lit? Damn near every firm claims to do some, but I think only a few do a lot.

Desert Fox wrote:If you work in NYC, would you mind giving me a run down of which firms do a significant amount patent lit? Damn near every firm claims to do some, but I think only a few do a lot.

refer to chambers, they have a better list than whtever I can provide here. And its free