Irell or O'Melveny? Forum

[Anonymous User]

From the associates that I've talked to, Irell century city is a bit intense, while Irell newport beach sounds pretty amazing (probably because it's a bit disconnected from the larger office and partners in CC). Irell Newport Beach would be fucking awesome if you can get that.

I've heard from numerous OC lawyers that Irell Newport is extremely intense

How is Irell Newport these days? Is the firm a sinking ship? Is general (non-patent) litigation still a thing there?

Irell associate here. Newport office is now about half the size of the Century City office. To the best of my knowledge, there's no substantive difference between the two offices. Most matters are staffed by people from both offices.

Even with the shake-ups, things have been excellent this year. The firm is in good financial shape and there's steady work. I think the recent bonuses are telling. The firm has had some great results too the past year or so. Four trial wins with recoveries over $100 million, including a $1.1 billion judgment. Plus a 9-0 SCOTUS victory. We're a small firm, but were recognized as having one of the Practice Groups of the Year for both IP and Trials.

We're trying to expand our general litigation practice, but IP is still the main focus. If you want to do patent litigation, I don't think there's a better firm out there for an associate. If you want to do general litigation, I think it's still worth looking into, but be aware that you may still be staffed on some patent matters.

This is excellent, thank you for sharing.

Different anon, but I would take such a rosy picture (which seems pulled directly from marketing materials, to be honest) with a grain of salt. Partners don’t leave a firm in the numbers they’ve been leaving Irell unless something is seriously wrong. There are more than a few similarities to Boies, another top flight lit firm facing mass partner defections and continued difficulty with reliance on a 70+ mega-rainmaker with outsized influence in firm affairs.

(Spoken as someone who spent most of the last decade in LA biglaw)

It is dissimilar from Boies in that the patent practice is doing gangbusters, the firm is financially extremely healthy, and newer patent litigation rainmakers are coming up through the ranks (though certainly not on Morgan Chi’s level yet). Andrei Iancu returning from the USPTO could be huge, too. But I would caution anyone against going there to do work other than patent litigation. In those areas, the firm has been in a downward spiral ever since the Hueston Hennigan split, with the widespread partner losses noted above and scattershot lateral efforts. In particular, at this point I would not advise any young associate hoping to work on commercial lit to go to Irell over O’Melveny. Frankly I’m very surprised that the poster above says the firm is still trying to beef up its commercial litigation practice. No shame in being a top flight patent boutique.

[Anonymous User]

From the associates that I've talked to, Irell century city is a bit intense, while Irell newport beach sounds pretty amazing (probably because it's a bit disconnected from the larger office and partners in CC). Irell Newport Beach would be fucking awesome if you can get that.

I've heard from numerous OC lawyers that Irell Newport is extremely intense

How is Irell Newport these days? Is the firm a sinking ship? Is general (non-patent) litigation still a thing there?

Irell associate here. Newport office is now about half the size of the Century City office. To the best of my knowledge, there's no substantive difference between the two offices. Most matters are staffed by people from both offices.

Even with the shake-ups, things have been excellent this year. The firm is in good financial shape and there's steady work. I think the recent bonuses are telling. The firm has had some great results too the past year or so. Four trial wins with recoveries over $100 million, including a $1.1 billion judgment. Plus a 9-0 SCOTUS victory. We're a small firm, but were recognized as having one of the Practice Groups of the Year for both IP and Trials.

We're trying to expand our general litigation practice, but IP is still the main focus. If you want to do patent litigation, I don't think there's a better firm out there for an associate. If you want to do general litigation, I think it's still worth looking into, but be aware that you may still be staffed on some patent matters.

This is excellent, thank you for sharing.

Different anon, but I would take such a rosy picture (which seems pulled directly from marketing materials, to be honest) with a grain of salt. Partners don’t leave a firm in the numbers they’ve been leaving Irell unless something is seriously wrong. There are more than a few similarities to Boies, another top flight lit firm facing mass partner defections and continued difficulty with reliance on a 70+ mega-rainmaker with outsized influence in firm affairs.

(Spoken as someone who spent most of the last decade in LA biglaw)

It is dissimilar from Boies in that the patent practice is doing gangbusters, the firm is financially extremely healthy, and newer patent litigation rainmakers are coming up through the ranks (though certainly not on Morgan Chi’s level yet). Andrei Iancu returning from the USPTO could be huge, too. But I would caution anyone against going there to do work other than patent litigation. In those areas, the firm has been in a downward spiral ever since the Hueston Hennigan split, with the widespread partner losses noted above and scattershot lateral efforts. In particular, at this point I would not advise any young associate hoping to work on commercial lit to go to Irell over O’Melveny. Frankly I’m very surprised that the poster above says the firm is still trying to beef up its commercial litigation practice. No shame in being a top flight patent boutique.

I’ve also heard that irell is trying to beef up its general commercial practice, though the patent / IP work is still bread and butter. Well see if its successful. For folks that are familiar with the firm, how is work/life balance? For a smaller firm it seems decent, but curious if anyone has any particular insight.

[Anonymous User]

I've heard from numerous OC lawyers that Irell Newport is extremely intense

How is Irell Newport these days? Is the firm a sinking ship? Is general (non-patent) litigation still a thing there?

Irell associate here. Newport office is now about half the size of the Century City office. To the best of my knowledge, there's no substantive difference between the two offices. Most matters are staffed by people from both offices.

Even with the shake-ups, things have been excellent this year. The firm is in good financial shape and there's steady work. I think the recent bonuses are telling. The firm has had some great results too the past year or so. Four trial wins with recoveries over $100 million, including a $1.1 billion judgment. Plus a 9-0 SCOTUS victory. We're a small firm, but were recognized as having one of the Practice Groups of the Year for both IP and Trials.

We're trying to expand our general litigation practice, but IP is still the main focus. If you want to do patent litigation, I don't think there's a better firm out there for an associate. If you want to do general litigation, I think it's still worth looking into, but be aware that you may still be staffed on some patent matters.

This is excellent, thank you for sharing.

Different anon, but I would take such a rosy picture (which seems pulled directly from marketing materials, to be honest) with a grain of salt. Partners don’t leave a firm in the numbers they’ve been leaving Irell unless something is seriously wrong. There are more than a few similarities to Boies, another top flight lit firm facing mass partner defections and continued difficulty with reliance on a 70+ mega-rainmaker with outsized influence in firm affairs.

(Spoken as someone who spent most of the last decade in LA biglaw)

It is dissimilar from Boies in that the patent practice is doing gangbusters, the firm is financially extremely healthy, and newer patent litigation rainmakers are coming up through the ranks (though certainly not on Morgan Chi’s level yet). Andrei Iancu returning from the USPTO could be huge, too. But I would caution anyone against going there to do work other than patent litigation. In those areas, the firm has been in a downward spiral ever since the Hueston Hennigan split, with the widespread partner losses noted above and scattershot lateral efforts. In particular, at this point I would not advise any young associate hoping to work on commercial lit to go to Irell over O’Melveny. Frankly I’m very surprised that the poster above says the firm is still trying to beef up its commercial litigation practice. No shame in being a top flight patent boutique.

I’ve also heard that irell is trying to beef up its general commercial practice, though the patent / IP work is still bread and butter. Well see if its successful. For folks that are familiar with the firm, how is work/life balance? For a smaller firm it seems decent, but curious if anyone has any particular insight.

Anon from a few posts back.

I think the poster above has the right take. The impression I get from Boies is that the firm is struggling due to a variety of factors, including bad press from certain clients, a lack of transparency from leadership, and too much expansion when revenue was on the downswing (referencing the LA office opening in particular). As important as Morgan Chu is, I think the firm is set up for continued success much better than Boies. Three of the trials I mentioned did not involve Morgan.

Irell's issue was the identity crisis after the Hueston Hennigan departure. Irell strived to be a full-service law firm. A series of events culminated in the the firm switching to a more lit boutique model last year. That resulted in the series of departures, consisting mainly of transactional attorneys and litigation attorneys who wanted the benefits of a full-service firm. As bad as the optics were at times, the end result has been a higher concentration of attorneys working in patent lit, which was always the most profitable practice area. And the results speak for themselves. At the start of the pandemic, when many firms were cutting salaries and laying off attorneys and staff, Irell gave out spring bonuses that were 10% of base compensation. I was truly worried when partners started leaving en masse, but the firm has weathered that storm better than I expected.

The main draw, besides the money, is the early responsibility. Our 1:1 leverage results in extremely lean teams for many cases. It's not at all uncommon for first years to lead depositions or for juniors to have their own witnesses at trial. Our summers have real assignments that are billed out to clients.

While patent lit is still king, the firm has stated that it wants to grow its general litigation practice, particularly focusing on complex trial work. Time will tell how successful that goal is or whether it is feasible.

I've found work life balance to not be an issue, at least no more than what is to be expected from biglaw. On average, LA biglaw is much more laid back than NYC biglaw, and that shows in associate morale. Even pre-COVID, it was not uncommon to have attorneys work from home multiple days a week. There's no facetime requirement. I think that goes a long way. But I think this is one of the bigger areas where your mileage will vary, and I know there are some high billers.

[Anonymous User]

How is Irell Newport these days? Is the firm a sinking ship? Is general (non-patent) litigation still a thing there?

Irell associate here. Newport office is now about half the size of the Century City office. To the best of my knowledge, there's no substantive difference between the two offices. Most matters are staffed by people from both offices.

Even with the shake-ups, things have been excellent this year. The firm is in good financial shape and there's steady work. I think the recent bonuses are telling. The firm has had some great results too the past year or so. Four trial wins with recoveries over $100 million, including a $1.1 billion judgment. Plus a 9-0 SCOTUS victory. We're a small firm, but were recognized as having one of the Practice Groups of the Year for both IP and Trials.

We're trying to expand our general litigation practice, but IP is still the main focus. If you want to do patent litigation, I don't think there's a better firm out there for an associate. If you want to do general litigation, I think it's still worth looking into, but be aware that you may still be staffed on some patent matters.

This is excellent, thank you for sharing.

Different anon, but I would take such a rosy picture (which seems pulled directly from marketing materials, to be honest) with a grain of salt. Partners don’t leave a firm in the numbers they’ve been leaving Irell unless something is seriously wrong. There are more than a few similarities to Boies, another top flight lit firm facing mass partner defections and continued difficulty with reliance on a 70+ mega-rainmaker with outsized influence in firm affairs.

(Spoken as someone who spent most of the last decade in LA biglaw)

It is dissimilar from Boies in that the patent practice is doing gangbusters, the firm is financially extremely healthy, and newer patent litigation rainmakers are coming up through the ranks (though certainly not on Morgan Chi’s level yet). Andrei Iancu returning from the USPTO could be huge, too. But I would caution anyone against going there to do work other than patent litigation. In those areas, the firm has been in a downward spiral ever since the Hueston Hennigan split, with the widespread partner losses noted above and scattershot lateral efforts. In particular, at this point I would not advise any young associate hoping to work on commercial lit to go to Irell over O’Melveny. Frankly I’m very surprised that the poster above says the firm is still trying to beef up its commercial litigation practice. No shame in being a top flight patent boutique.

I’ve also heard that irell is trying to beef up its general commercial practice, though the patent / IP work is still bread and butter. Well see if its successful. For folks that are familiar with the firm, how is work/life balance? For a smaller firm it seems decent, but curious if anyone has any particular insight.

Anon from a few posts back.

I think the poster above has the right take. The impression I get from Boies is that the firm is struggling due to a variety of factors, including bad press from certain clients, a lack of transparency from leadership, and too much expansion when revenue was on the downswing (referencing the LA office opening in particular). As important as Morgan Chu is, I think the firm is set up for continued success much better than Boies. Three of the trials I mentioned did not involve Morgan.

Irell's issue was the identity crisis after the Hueston Hennigan departure. Irell strived to be a full-service law firm. A series of events culminated in the the firm switching to a more lit boutique model last year. That resulted in the series of departures, consisting mainly of transactional attorneys and litigation attorneys who wanted the benefits of a full-service firm. As bad as the optics were at times, the end result has been a higher concentration of attorneys working in patent lit, which was always the most profitable practice area. And the results speak for themselves. At the start of the pandemic, when many firms were cutting salaries and laying off attorneys and staff, Irell gave out spring bonuses that were 10% of base compensation. I was truly worried when partners started leaving en masse, but the firm has weathered that storm better than I expected.

The main draw, besides the money, is the early responsibility. Our 1:1 leverage results in extremely lean teams for many cases. It's not at all uncommon for first years to lead depositions or for juniors to have their own witnesses at trial. Our summers have real assignments that are billed out to clients.

While patent lit is still king, the firm has stated that it wants to grow its general litigation practice, particularly focusing on complex trial work. Time will tell how successful that goal is or whether it is feasible.

I've found work life balance to not be an issue, at least no more than what is to be expected from biglaw. On average, LA biglaw is much more laid back than NYC biglaw, and that shows in associate morale. Even pre-COVID, it was not uncommon to have attorneys work from home multiple days a week. There's no facetime requirement. I think that goes a long way. But I think this is one of the bigger areas where your mileage will vary, and I know there are some high billers.

Does anyone know what Irell's clerkship bonus policy is? It says $105k for appellate, and market for d. ct. (presumably $50k). Curious if COA->d.ct. would mean $105k or more with two?

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Why not take Irell offer to interview with Hueston Hennigan? That's where the gen. commercial lit / white collar lit is at.

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Why not take Irell offer to interview with Hueston Hennigan? That's where the gen. commercial lit / white collar lit is at.

Op here. No word from HH yet; I've tried pushing them.

How does Irell compare to OMM in 2022 if I'm trying to coast in general commercial lit for a few years?

[dtlaatty]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Yes. Very.

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Yes. Very.

Mind elaborating?

[dtlaatty]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Yes. Very.

Mind elaborating?

At this point Irell is essentially a pure patent shop. An excellent one, to be clear, and the litigation training you would get would be excellent. But even if they handle the odd commercial lit case, you will almost certainly end up spending the majority of your time on patent matters.

[Anonymous User]

Is Irell a bad choice compared to OMM for someone looking to do general commercial lit and to stay out of patent lit? I'm considering both.

Yes. Very.

Mind elaborating?

At this point Irell is essentially a pure patent shop. An excellent one, to be clear, and the litigation training you would get would be excellent. But even if they handle the odd commercial lit case, you will almost certainly end up spending the majority of your time on patent matters.

Thanks. I'll pm you a more specific question.