Top Law Schools

.

same gpa from ccn, any advice for that?

but to op- i wouldnt bid on irell- they only take around top 10% at my ccn usually. quinn is known for being rough on grades too (not sure about sf though, but they're grade conscious for ny and la so id assume sf as well). if u wanna be in the bay area- why not skadden sf/pa, goodwin sf/mp, latham sf?

you're def out at irell, i wouldn't waste a bid there. i can't speak to M, but it seems your GPA might be on the low side for a lot of the places that you're bidding on

Anonymous User wrote:you're def out at irell, i wouldn't waste a bid there. i can't speak to M, but it seems your GPA might be on the low side for a lot of the places that you're bidding on

Agreed. Isn't 3.3 around median at Michigan? Quinn and Irell are definitely out with median grades, and firms like Mayer, Orrick, Wilson Sonsini, and several of these others are going to be stretches unless you have significant SF ties. Your best bet is to focus on the larger SA classes in LA.

Rising Michigan 3L:

(1) Do you want to do litigation or transactional? You seem to have places that mainly do one or the other. If you want to do litigation, I would immediately remove Skadden and Simpson Thatcher (you should probably remove these on GPA grounds alone) among others.

(2) Have you looked at the GPA profiles for these firms? This list is way too optimistic, to the point where I think you just put down all the California firms you saw. I was not even sure that Howard Rice OCIed at Michigan (maybe they are this year), but definitely remove them (to give you an idea of how selective they are, many of their associates have clerked for the Supreme Court). Also remove Quinn SF, Irell, Gibson, Kirkland SF, Mofo, Latham, and Paul Hastings.

(3) How much does being in California matter to you? Even with the remaining firms, you have a substantial chance of striking out. California, especially SF, firms are grade selective, tie-selective, and have generally very small classes (especially once you remove Quinn and Mofo from the mix). I would add in 15 large, non-grade selective NY firms to hedge your bets (and that's still being optimistic; at median, I would be very hestitant to have half my bidlist be California firms). I would then mass-mail all the California firms in late July that you cannot bid/do not get chosen for an interview for.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:you're def out at irell, i wouldn't waste a bid there. i can't speak to M, but it seems your GPA might be on the low side for a lot of the places that you're bidding on

Agreed. Isn't 3.3 around median at Michigan? Quinn and Irell are definitely out with median grades, and firms like Mayer, Orrick, Wilson Sonsini, and several of these others are going to be stretches unless you have significant SF ties. Your best bet is to focus on the larger SA classes in LA.

What are these larger SA classes? I am also bidding on LA and am not finding very many with decent sized classes.

Gibson and Irell both have very large summer classes, but as stated, they're very grade selective.

FWIW: Irell has a specific grade cutoff for each school. At my CCN it's about the top 30%. But they usually take people only in the top 10-20%.

Bid Kirkland SF higher.

Anonymous User wrote:
(2) Have you looked at the GPA profiles for these firms? This list is way too optimistic, to the point where I think you just put down all the California firms you saw. I was not even sure that Howard Rice OCIed at Michigan (maybe they are this year), but definitely remove them (to give you an idea of how selective they are, many of their associates have clerked for the Supreme Court). Also remove Quinn SF, Irell, Gibson, Kirkland SF, Mofo, Latham, and Paul Hastings.

Howard Rice doesn't exist anymore; it combined with Arnold & Porter, and is now one of the largest offices in the Bay Area. Worth a bid (especially since people probably aren't aware), but a longshot with a 3.3.

Anonymous User wrote:Rising Michigan 3L:

(1) Do you want to do litigation or transactional? You seem to have places that mainly do one or the other. If you want to do litigation, I would immediately remove Skadden and Simpson Thatcher (you should probably remove these on GPA grounds alone) among others.

(2) Have you looked at the GPA profiles for these firms? This list is way too optimistic, to the point where I think you just put down all the California firms you saw. I was not even sure that Howard Rice OCIed at Michigan (maybe they are this year), but definitely remove them (to give you an idea of how selective they are, many of their associates have clerked for the Supreme Court). Also remove Quinn SF, Irell, Gibson, Kirkland SF, Mofo, Latham, and Paul Hastings.

(3) How much does being in California matter to you? Even with the remaining firms, you have a substantial chance of striking out. California, especially SF, firms are grade selective, tie-selective, and have generally very small classes (especially once you remove Quinn and Mofo from the mix). I would add in 15 large, non-grade selective NY firms to hedge your bets (and that's still being optimistic; at median, I would be very hestitant to have half my bidlist be California firms). I would then mass-mail all the California firms in late July that you cannot bid/do not get chosen for an interview for.

.

.