WilmerHale vs. Paul Hastings (both SV)
Posted: Thu Sep 04, 2014 12:33 pm
My concerns, in order of importance to me:
1. Offer rate/layoffs/financial stability: Anyone have insight into this? I heard about the WH layoffs last year with respect to the Apple v. Samsung case. Haven't really heard anything on PH. During interviews both (unsurprisingly) claimed to be stable and conservatively managed.
2. Practice Areas: Lit, maybe IP lit (I don't have tech background). I would give the edge to WH here because they repeatedly told me that I could do IP lit w/o a tech background (with the exception of "core IP"). They also said they place an emphasis on each IP Lit team having a mix of people with tech backgrounds and without, in effect encouraging me to do IP lit if I was interested. With PH, I was told I could try IP Lit assignments but that ultimately as a junior associate I probably wouldn't be part of that practice group (because clients only want attorneys with tech backgrounds on the team). All of this being said I don't even know if I would like IP Lit but I'd like to keep that option open. I also don't know whether to trust that I could actually do IP at WH -- maybe it's just flame.
3. Exit options: My gut is that they would be around the same from each firm and that it would depend more on the substantive work I end up doing.
4. Work/life balance: It was very hard to tell from my interviews. Again, seemed more practice group dependent than anything.
5. People/culture: Got the same vibe from both, although I enjoyed talking to my WH interviewers more
Anything I should be looking at that I'm missing? Any input would really be appreciated. Thanks!
1. Offer rate/layoffs/financial stability: Anyone have insight into this? I heard about the WH layoffs last year with respect to the Apple v. Samsung case. Haven't really heard anything on PH. During interviews both (unsurprisingly) claimed to be stable and conservatively managed.
2. Practice Areas: Lit, maybe IP lit (I don't have tech background). I would give the edge to WH here because they repeatedly told me that I could do IP lit w/o a tech background (with the exception of "core IP"). They also said they place an emphasis on each IP Lit team having a mix of people with tech backgrounds and without, in effect encouraging me to do IP lit if I was interested. With PH, I was told I could try IP Lit assignments but that ultimately as a junior associate I probably wouldn't be part of that practice group (because clients only want attorneys with tech backgrounds on the team). All of this being said I don't even know if I would like IP Lit but I'd like to keep that option open. I also don't know whether to trust that I could actually do IP at WH -- maybe it's just flame.
3. Exit options: My gut is that they would be around the same from each firm and that it would depend more on the substantive work I end up doing.
4. Work/life balance: It was very hard to tell from my interviews. Again, seemed more practice group dependent than anything.
5. People/culture: Got the same vibe from both, although I enjoyed talking to my WH interviewers more
Anything I should be looking at that I'm missing? Any input would really be appreciated. Thanks!