Top Law Schools

Hi,
2L here. Are clerkships highly valued in IP litigation? What kind of clerkships should someone interested in IP lit pursue? I'm guessing any kind of federal for patent. And would one risk turning a judge off by highlighting something like a tech background in a clerkship application?

note to self: remember to read this thread 3L year.

My firm wouldn't be upset with any clerkship, but Federal Circuit>>>EDVA>>>>maybe D.Del, D.D.C. or EDTX>>>>>>>>>>>anywhere else

Anonymous User wrote:My firm wouldn't be upset with any clerkship, but Federal Circuit>>>EDVA>>>>maybe D.Del, D.D.C. or EDTX>>>>>>>>>>>anywhere else

Does NDCA mean something alongsid the other districts?

r6_philly wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:My firm wouldn't be upset with any clerkship, but Federal Circuit>>>EDVA>>>>maybe D.Del, D.D.C. or EDTX>>>>>>>>>>>anywhere else

Does NDCA mean something alongsid the other districts?

Yea that's another good one.

I'm not sure why:

(a) any judge would be turned off by a technical background? Assuming you have stellar law school grades (plus good recs, LR, etc.), a judge probably isn't going to be turned off by what you did before law school. If you have work experience, it will likely make you a more attractive candiate.

(b) IP litigation is so different from any other type of litigation that a clerkship would not be beneficial? Other types of lit use experts, involve technical matters, etc.

Anonymous User wrote:My firm wouldn't be upset with any clerkship, but Federal Circuit>>>EDVA>>>>maybe D.Del, D.D.C. or EDTX>>>>>>>>>>>anywhere else

As a general matter, the best district court clerkships for patent litigation are, in no particular order, EDTX, DDel, NDCA, EDVA, and some also include CDCA. These courts tend to have patent heavy dockets. My personal experience is that, because patent litigation is just a species of litigation, any district court clerkship is looked on favorably by firms. You learn a lot about the nuts and bolts of litigation in a district court clerkship that you do not learn in law school. I have heard people compare a year at a district court clerkship as being akin to spending 2 years at a firm in terms knowledge.

Of course, a CAFC clerkship is very prestigious in the patent litigation world. CAFC clerkships, however, are very difficult to get straight out of law school. Most CAFC judges hire clerks who have already done a district court clerkship (frequently in the districts I have listed above), or have worked for 2-3 years in the patent litigation group of a large firm (think Finnegan, Weil, Kirkland, Fish). But it is not unheard of for someone to get a CAFC clerkship right out of law school.

If you know you are going to do patent litigation, I do not think it would be worthwhile to seek a COA clerkship anywhere but the CAFC. My sense is that the general appellate knowledge you would learn at any other COA wouldn't be that helpful. I think you would be better off doing a district court clerkship, although a lot of district court judges are now hiring clerks that have worked for a few years, so getting one of these clerkships right after graduating is becoming more difficult as well.

To answer the last question posed by the original poster, I have do not think any judge would be turned off by your tech background.