Top Law Schools

I'm interested in patent litigation. Currently considering Paul Hastings, Fitzpatrick Cella, and Winston Strawn. Anyone have any advice/input?

Why are you going into patent litigation? Seems like a bad choice.

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Why are you going into patent litigation? Seems like a bad choice.

Why?

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Why are you going into patent litigation? Seems like a bad choice.

Why?

Obviously depends on the type. Pharma lit including generics v. brand name, and biosimilars are practices doing very well. I can't speak for the rest of patent lit though

Paul Hastings has a huge life sciences pharma patent lit group that is doing very well. I can only speak for life sciences lit, but other firms like Paul Hastings, Ropes & Gray, Goodwin Proctor are firms with large life sciences/pharma/biotech groups that are very much sustainable. I'm sure there are others

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:Why are you going into patent litigation? Seems like a bad choice.

Why?

Obviously depends on the type. Pharma lit including generics v. brand name, and biosimilars are practices doing very well. I can't speak for the rest of patent lit though

OP: All of my offers thus far have strong pharma/biosimilars practices, just trying to gauge how those firms are viewed in the market.

if pharma, go PH/winston

if non-pharma, go PH/winston

dont wanna get caught in a boutique that goes under...especially as a junior lawyer

From BCG Search:

2015 has been a line of demarcation for Intellectual Property litigation hiring. Following the Supreme Court ruling on patent eligibility subject matter, many firms have seen a decrease in IP litigation needs. While there will always be a need for patent litigators in Silicon Valley, we have certainly seen a steep and steady decrease in the number of IP litigation postings-and firms have become more selective in choosing candidates. Current vacancies are for associates with a hard science background in the junior to mid-level range. More and more firms are expecting USPTO admittance for their IP litigation candidates.

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900045 ... r-2015/#01

It's pretty clear to me that there has been a fundamental shift and that IP litigation is not, and never will be, a hot practice area again. I know someone on here keeps posting Lex Machina stats or something that show steady or even increased case filings, but I think that's not really a good sign of the health of the practice area for a number of reasons (mainly because I think trolls are throwing every patent they've got at every company imaginable in EDTX before everything finally gets shut down for them for good).

PH's non-pharma IP lit group is hot right now too. But that could obviously go the other way.

Disagree that trolls are going all in before it all goes belly up. Software patents aren't the only type of patents available. They are moving to hardware patents.

The increase in USPTO eligible people is probably post grant related. Filing an IPR/CBM is a standard part of district court litigation now.

Speaking of post grant, Naveen Modi just joined PH from Finnegan and is killing it at bringing in post grant work. His group has hired about 4 laterals in the past two months.

Anonymous User wrote:PH's non-pharma IP lit group is hot right now too. But that could obviously go the other way.

Disagree that trolls are going all in before it all goes belly up. Software patents aren't the only type of patents available. They are moving to hardware patents.

The increase in USPTO eligible people is probably post grant related. Filing an IPR/CBM is a standard part of district court litigation now.

Speaking of post grant, Naveen Modi just joined PH from Finnegan and is killing it at bringing in post grant work. His group has hired about 4 laterals in the past two months.

lol. that shit will all be gone in a few years, except the pharma. patent valuations are still the lowest they have ever been since people started keeping track. you've got a bunch of assholes making their living off this shit who are grasping at straws. Congress/Obama (and Hillary) and big industry will find a way to shut it down.

pharma is really the only mainstay. i think pharma is launching a lobbying counterattack right now, but the eventual result might be completely separate treatment for pharma patents (allowing them and strengthening ability to enforce them while flushing everything else down the shitter).

Was it PH who picked up Yar? He's a superstar, which explains the boom (along with some other good hires, like you mentioned).

One firm does not make a trend, however. Quinn has a much larger IP practice and is a sinking ship.

Quinn is a sinking ship because they had Samsung for the smartphone war stuff, but that is over and nothing replaced. Coincidentally, PH does a lot of Samsung work now.

The reason several V20 firms are hurting isn't because of Alice or patent reform. It's the end of the smartphone wars. You guys feasted on megacases but can't run a 4 mil troll case under budget.

The days of V20 firms throwing dozens of random associates on a cases are over, but patent lit isn't dying. Well, not dying so long as Congress doesn't really pass fee shifting as default.

I'm not sure what practice areas are sure to be hot going forward.

Anonymous User wrote:Quinn is a sinking ship because they had Samsung for the smartphone war stuff, but that is over and nothing replaced. Coincidentally, PH does a lot of Samsung work now.

The reason several V20 firms are hurting isn't because of Alice or patent reform. It's the end of the smartphone wars. You guys feasted on megacases but can't run a 4 mil troll case under budget.

The days of V20 firms throwing dozens of random associates on a cases are over, but patent lit isn't dying. Well, not dying so long as Congress doesn't really pass fee shifting as default.

I'm not sure what practice areas are sure to be hot going forward.

THIS

Anonymous User wrote:Quinn is a sinking ship because they had Samsung for the smartphone war stuff, but that is over and nothing replaced. Coincidentally, PH does a lot of Samsung work now.

The reason several V20 firms are hurting isn't because of Alice or patent reform. It's the end of the smartphone wars. You guys feasted on megacases but can't run a 4 mil troll case under budget.

The days of V20 firms throwing dozens of random associates on a cases are over, but patent lit isn't dying. Well, not dying so long as Congress doesn't really pass fee shifting as default.

I'm not sure what practice areas are sure to be hot going forward.

ED Tex is the only thing propping up currently filing levels. Basically every troll case is getting filed there now.

Desert Fox wrote:god bless their refusal to stop cases for IPR.

...and their refusal to invalidate under Alice at the same rate as other districts.

Desert Fox wrote:

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:god bless their refusal to stop cases for IPR.

...and their refusal to invalidate under Alice at the same rate as other districts.

I saw an article about that yesterday, but somehow they said ED Tex only heard Alice arguments 11 times. Which seems way too low.

Maybe they were only counting MTDs?

Desert Fox wrote:I heard that they were requiring a letter to the court to request the ability to file a MTD on Alice grounds. I wonder if they are just rejecting them all and wasn't getting counted.

Yeah, that's sort of what I was referring too -- also, I remember ED Tex sometimes wasn't letting folks do post-trial or MSJ Alice motions right after Alice came down.

Desert Fox wrote:I heard that they were requiring a letter to the court to request the ability to file a MTD on Alice grounds. I wonder if they are just rejecting them all and wasn't getting counted.

I think it's just Gilstrap who wants a letter to the court right now: http://www.technologylawdispatch.com/20 ... ent-cases/

I wonder if other judges in ED Tex. will follow suit though.

camelcrema wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:I heard that they were requiring a letter to the court to request the ability to file a MTD on Alice grounds. I wonder if they are just rejecting them all and wasn't getting counted.

I think it's just Gilstrap who wants a letter to the court right now: http://www.technologylawdispatch.com/20 ... ent-cases/

I wonder if other judges in ED Tex. will follow suit though.

Isn't Gilstrap accounting for like 85% of the patent cases down there now?

Biglaw_Associate_V20 wrote:

camelcrema wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:I heard that they were requiring a letter to the court to request the ability to file a MTD on Alice grounds. I wonder if they are just rejecting them all and wasn't getting counted.

I think it's just Gilstrap who wants a letter to the court right now: http://www.technologylawdispatch.com/20 ... ent-cases/

I wonder if other judges in ED Tex. will follow suit though.

Isn't Gilstrap accounting for like 85% of the patent cases down there now?

I don't know if I've seen a number as high as 85% but certainly a massive chunk.