IP Law: Worth finishing up science courses? Forum

[whatchoicetomake]

.

[johndhi]

First, you're a fucking beast if you're considering going to community college during law school.

Anyway, I recommend against it. I don't want to make any guarantees, but top 25% at a T14 and science cred should definitely be enough to get you a biglaw IP litigation gig. The patent bar is for patent prosecution, which people tend to think is fucking boring. If you're really planning on litigation, forget about it and focus on staying in the top 25 or improving if you can. FYI I'm nearly top of class at lower T14 and got offers from (IMO) the two strongest IP litigation firms in California. I have friends at median who got IP litigation gigs through superlative interviewing. So work on that and keep trucking at school and good luck. We left science for a reason bro!

[Emu Flu]

I would just do it after your start working. I've noticed some patent litigators get a BS degree while working to get the patent bar credential.

The registration number is primarily for patent prosecution, but there are many litigation-alternative strategies available that require practice before the USPTO.

[Agent]

Post removed by OP, so Agent follows suit with the quote

Need more info about your technical abilities. Inclined to say that you should just focus on law grades and networking.

[turbotong]

If you did pass the pat bar, then you could definitely throw that on as an extra line on your resume that looks good.
Interviewers will know it means little to nothing in litigation - as Emu Flu said, it is primarily for patent prosecution
However, many clients won't really know what it is good for and it will be a selling point for partners to say to say, "Hey, even our litigators have passed the patent bar! that's how hax we are!"

[r6_philly]

If you did pass the pat bar, then you could definitely throw that on as an extra line on your resume that looks good.
Interviewers will know it means little to nothing in litigation - as Emu Flu said, it is primarily for patent prosecution
However, many clients won't really know what it is good for and it will be a selling point for partners to say to say, "Hey, even our litigators have passed the patent bar! that's how hax we are!"

I've been told on interviews that passing the patent bar provides some benefits to litigators, so they encourage everyone who is eligible to take it. So I suppose being eligible is just another plus for the candidate (over one who isn't).

[Big Shrimpin]

If you did pass the pat bar, then you could definitely throw that on as an extra line on your resume that looks good.
Interviewers will know it means little to nothing in litigation - as Emu Flu said, it is primarily for patent prosecution
However, many clients won't really know what it is good for and it will be a selling point for partners to say to say, "Hey, even our litigators have passed the patent bar! that's how hax we are!"

I've been told on interviews that passing the patent bar provides some benefits to litigators, so they encourage everyone who is eligible to take it. So I suppose being eligible is just another plus for the candidate (over one who isn't).

It's definitely a plus. Every firm I interviewed with last year corroborated as such. Many of the litigators (almost all) at my firm have it, despite not doing any prosecution. For litigators (from a client's perspective), it often serves as a proxy for an understanding of the prosecution system. Thus, a client can be assured that you understand the underlying prosecution issues in a litigation, etc., notwithstanding whether you actually practice before the patent bar.

[Agent]

Agreed that a registration number is a plus-- but the extent of its positive impact will depend, in part, on your technical background.

The question, of course, is whether that benefit will outweigh the costs, as your law grades and activities will probably take a hit. Need more info.