markman wrote:I think you could be a hot commodity in the soon-to-be-real patent commodities market.
Snark or legit theory? Sources? TYIA.
markman wrote:I think you could be a hot commodity in the soon-to-be-real patent commodities market.
This. If actual, could you expand on this?Big Shrimpin wrote:markman wrote:I think you could be a hot commodity in the soon-to-be-real patent commodities market.
Snark or legit theory? Sources? TYIA.
Not the original person who asked the question, but I am in a similar, although not identical situation (chem degree, 1L summer with a fed judge, but my 2L summer is with in-house patent counsel and I am at a school in the mid T2 range). However I don't have ties to DC or NY.Anonymous User wrote:No I would prefer not to do prosecution, I enjoy litigation and most of my experiences in law school have been based on litigation (1L summer doing copyright litigation, doing a clinic at school, working at the USAO's office, judicial internship...)markman wrote:Do you want to do prosecution?Anonymous User wrote:I'm currently a rising 3L at a T20 wanting to go into patent lit after graduation. I'm barred at the PTO but only have an undergraduate chem degree. I have median grades and no law review or journal. Decided to do environmental law this summer at a government agency so did not summer anywhere. Have ties to DC and NY.
Anyone have advice on which firms I should be targeting?
markman wrote:for PRG you'll need bar license. PTAB can pro hac you, but they won't if you're not reg'd. just look up these acronyms and read some literature you'll figure out what I just said.ip2012 wrote:Markman, if you are still answering questions, I would like to know how much background technical knowledge is needed to practice IP lit?
(for example, will someone with a bio background be in over their heads trying to do infringement claim charts for a software program?)
PRG will be important. They're trying to go from district courts to PTAB and they'll succeed to some extent.
Speaking about D.Cts and ITC alone, you don't "need" tech bg, but how you're going to construe claims or prep noninfr or inval contentions without a tech bg is your call.
Employers use tech bg as proxy for competence. But it's more than that. Lots of cases I've worked on, I've had to employ my tech bg and have actually had to jog my memory back to college.
Want to continue reading?
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
Most firms will get you materials like this if you ask, or might already have them in the library. I wouldn't buy it yourself until you find out if that is an option.ip2012 wrote:Markman, have you found any patent books useful in your practice?
some of the PLI books by Faber and others seem to have good reviews. They are quite expensive and was wondering if you had any experience with them.
Matthews Moys Chisum all good.ip2012 wrote:Markman, have you found any patent books useful in your practice?
some of the PLI books by Faber and others seem to have good reviews. They are quite expensive and was wondering if you had any experience with them.
chem wrote:So given the choice, a patent boutique would be a better career choice than a big law firm with a patent practice group?markman wrote: My single recommendation to you is - take the patent bar, go work at a patent boutique, do all three (lit, lic, pros), and then see where you want life to take you. Wow this post was massive.
I think this is mostly true for smaller boutiques like Knobbe/Kenyon types. Not true for bigger firms like Fish. I think it's hard to pick up the same skills and experiences with the rest of your class in a bigger firm setting if you split time between both sides.Anonymous User wrote:chem wrote:So given the choice, a patent boutique would be a better career choice than a big law firm with a patent practice group?markman wrote: My single recommendation to you is - take the patent bar, go work at a patent boutique, do all three (lit, lic, pros), and then see where you want life to take you. Wow this post was massive.
This is to my interest as well, and thanks for doing this.
It is clear to me that if I only want to do prosecution, boutique is definitely the way to go. But if I want to do both prosecution and litigation, would it still be better to work for a boutique (e.g. Fish/Knobbe/Kenyon) than for a full service IP GP firm (e.g. K&E/Mofo/Ropes)?
I've had some IP boutique SA experience but no GP experience, so would really like to hear your opinion on this.
Register now!
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
An MS. in CS is extremely valuable, decent grades and work will come easy.ejrubin wrote:Hi,
I'm completing my Masters in CS right now and will be applying to LS in the fall. I will be eligible to take the patent bar under Category B Option 4, although I still must take two physics courses to complete the requirement.
A few questions:
1.) For patent bar eligibility, does it matter where I take the two physics courses? Could I just take the courses from a certified online college or a local community college?
2.) With regard to employers, how hard is it to find patent work for someone with a MSCS and a JD? I am looking to work in Boston, but am contemplating getting a scholarship to a more distant school (UConn) instead of paying ticket for BU/BC. What I can't get a good hold of is the demand for someone with my background. With good grades at a lower-tier school, I wonder if a tech background will still allow me to get patent work in a major city like Boston.
3.) Do IP Firms focus their associates on what area of science they are most proficient at? In other words, for people with a CS degree, would most IP firms assign them work on Mech E. patents or some other less related field?
4.) It seems that passing the patent bar before law school would be helpful in finding a LS summer internship. With that said, how helpful would it be? If studying for the patent bar before LS would be extremely difficult, would it be worth the misery? Or would someone with a tech background and good LS grades not necessarily need that extra bump.
Thanks.
not the OP but had a similar decision:Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on best place for IP lit?
Dechert SV
Cooley SV
Quinn SV
Akin nyc
Kaye scholer nyc
Strong preference for SV.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
validwiseowl wrote:TBF, "markman" would be a pretty common, nondescript name for someone interested in patents
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Already a member? Login
I'd probably pick Cooley and Quinn as two good ones. Cooley has some good patent litigators. Kaye Scholer NYC has good patent litigators.Anonymous User wrote:Thoughts on best place for IP lit?
Dechert SV
Cooley SV
Quinn SV
Akin nyc
Kaye scholer nyc
Strong preference for SV.
yeah its easier to make partner on a statistical basis in a patent boutique than a random associate at a GP firm. But the relevant comparison is with the odds of making partner as a patent litigator in a GP firm, isn't it? I don't know the answer.Anonymous User wrote:If you are still taking questions, I would love to hear what you have to say about odds of making partner at a larger ip boutique. I will be joining one of the larger ones (200+) that do both prosecution and litigation. Is it hard not to make partner? I am sure associates choose to leave on their own will or they choose to lateral to another firm or go in house. But for the associates who want to stay put and make partner, what are your thoughts on the odds? I would think it would be harder to make partner at a GP firm.
Additionally, if one laterals to a GP firm after 3 or so years, do your odds of making partner increase at that GP firm that you lateraled to? Do talks of partnership come up during the interviewing/post-offer conversations with the lateral firm?
also, i dont see wats wrong with that post at intelprop forums. bro is asking where the women are plentiful. how is that not one of life's most important questions?? like almost by definition, since reproduction is basic need.wiseowl wrote:TBF, "markman" would be a pretty common, nondescript name for someone interested in patents
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login