Litigation Career -- Advisable to Skip Clerkship? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Rising 3L, likely going into patent litigation. I have been considering applying for Fed. Cir. clerkship. Not sure I'd land a clerkship if I did apply, but I could be a decently competitive applicant. My question is whether it makes sense to apply.

My career goals are along the following lines: work at firm until I have enough money (likely ~15 years), move somewhere with nice weather, work part-time at a small firm, maybe teach a patent class at a local law school. For purposes of this thread, let's assume that sticking around at the firm for ~15 years is realistic regardless of the clerkship decision.

Clerking would be a big prestige boost (and it would be pretty fun IMO), but it would also cost a lot of income, thereby delaying the semi-retirement goal. On top of the salary difference between law firm and clerkship, my firm offered me a class year bump, and I think it's likely that I'd have to sacrifice a year of seniority advancement to clerk (seniority would otherwise be two years ahead of actual firm experience).

Is chasing the clerkship experience, connections, and prestige the right answer here, even given that it would probably cost 200k+? Or can I achieve my career goals more efficiently without clerking?

[trebekismyhero]

How would it cost you $200k? I get the class bump, but that means you would make probably 170k instead of 160 and then you probably would make 70-80k as a clerk and then get a $50k bonus. Am I missing something?

[Anonymous User]

Clerkship salary + bonus is 50-100k less than firm salary + bonus. Additionally, I'd likely lose a year of salary advancement. The lost year of advancement costs roughly 20k per year on the associate scale. Impact on partnership timeline/compensation is impossible to predict at this point.

[84651846190]

Rising 3L, likely going into patent litigation. I have been considering applying for Fed. Cir. clerkship. Not sure I'd land a clerkship if I did apply, but I could be a decently competitive applicant. My question is whether it makes sense to apply.

My career goals are along the following lines: work at firm until I have enough money (likely ~15 years), move somewhere with nice weather, work part-time at a small firm, maybe teach a patent class at a local law school. For purposes of this thread, let's assume that sticking around at the firm for ~15 years is realistic regardless of the clerkship decision.

Clerking would be a big prestige boost (and it would be pretty fun IMO), but it would also cost a lot of income, thereby delaying the semi-retirement goal. On top of the salary difference between law firm and clerkship, my firm offered me a class year bump, and I think it's likely that I'd have to sacrifice a year of seniority advancement to clerk (seniority would otherwise be two years ahead of actual firm experience).

Is chasing the clerkship experience, connections, and prestige the right answer here, even given that it would probably cost 200k+? Or can I achieve my career goals more efficiently without clerking?

In all seriousness, though, clerking is pretty awesome if you can swing it financially. I would do it. There are plenty of threads on here discussing the relative worth of a clerkship, but I think a Fed. Cir. clerkship for IP litigation is about as practical as it gets (except maybe for a d. ct. clerkship with Gilstrap or something if you really want nuts-and-bolts usefulness). Do you have the top 5%, top 10 law school credentials to be seriously considered for academia (tenure track, not just adjunct)? If so, that would be cool and a Fed. Cir. clerkship would definitely help. If you're in it for the money, I think the prestige boost would follow you through your career if you clerk for the Fed. Cir. I have heard more than one in house attorney request law firm attorneys with Fed. Cir. clerkships to work on their matters (seriously). Clerking on the Fed. Cir. will actually make you an expert in an area of law, rather than being merely a shiny gold star on your resume like most COA clerkships.

[Anonymous User]

In all seriousness, though, clerking is pretty awesome if you can swing it financially. I would do it. There are plenty of threads on here discussing the relative worth of a clerkship, but I think a Fed. Cir. clerkship for IP litigation is about as practical as it gets (except maybe for a d. ct. clerkship with Gilstrap or something if you really want nuts-and-bolts usefulness). Do you have the top 5%, top 10 law school credentials to be seriously considered for academia (tenure track, not just adjunct)? If so, that would be cool and a Fed. Cir. clerkship would definitely help. If you're in it for the money, I think the prestige boost would follow you through your career if you clerk for the Fed. Cir. I have heard more than one in house attorney request law firm attorneys with Fed. Cir. clerkships to work on their matters (seriously). Clerking on the Fed. Cir. will actually make you an expert in an area of law, rather than being merely a shiny gold star on your resume like most COA clerkships.

Thanks for response. My thought process is that clerking would be an interesting way to spend a year, but I'm not sure it would translate into anything more tangible than an ego boost in my case. While I love an ego boost as much as the next person, I'm not crazy about opportunity cost without tangible benefit.

I was lucky to wind up at a firm where partnership is quite realistic, and I don't think clerking would improve my standing at the firm. I'm also not interested in tenure track academia. Teaching a seminar as an adjunct would be appealing, but I don't think I'd need the clerkship on my resume to do so.

The one benefit that I'm hesitant to ignore is the potential for the clerkship to help me bring in business down the road. The process of pitching to a prospective litigation client is something of a black box for me at this point -- I really do not know the factors involved or how they are weighted. If it matters, I expect that I will be well-positioned to bring in prosecution clients.

[jbagelboy]

I think it would be a mistake for an aspiring patent litigator to turn down the opportunity to clerk on the fed circuit (if such an opportunity was within reach) just for the short term benefit of making a little more money in the next 2-3 years.

[84651846190]

In all seriousness, though, clerking is pretty awesome if you can swing it financially. I would do it. There are plenty of threads on here discussing the relative worth of a clerkship, but I think a Fed. Cir. clerkship for IP litigation is about as practical as it gets (except maybe for a d. ct. clerkship with Gilstrap or something if you really want nuts-and-bolts usefulness). Do you have the top 5%, top 10 law school credentials to be seriously considered for academia (tenure track, not just adjunct)? If so, that would be cool and a Fed. Cir. clerkship would definitely help. If you're in it for the money, I think the prestige boost would follow you through your career if you clerk for the Fed. Cir. I have heard more than one in house attorney request law firm attorneys with Fed. Cir. clerkships to work on their matters (seriously). Clerking on the Fed. Cir. will actually make you an expert in an area of law, rather than being merely a shiny gold star on your resume like most COA clerkships.

Thanks for response. My thought process is that clerking would be an interesting way to spend a year, but I'm not sure it would translate into anything more tangible than an ego boost in my case. While I love an ego boost as much as the next person, I'm not crazy about opportunity cost without tangible benefit.

I was lucky to wind up at a firm where partnership is quite realistic, and I don't think clerking would improve my standing at the firm. I'm also not interested in tenure track academia. Teaching a seminar as an adjunct would be appealing, but I don't think I'd need the clerkship on my resume to do so.

The one benefit that I'm hesitant to ignore is the potential for the clerkship to help me bring in business down the road. The process of pitching to a prospective litigation client is something of a black box for me at this point -- I really do not know the factors involved or how they are weighted. If it matters, I expect that I will be well-positioned to bring in prosecution clients.

I can tell you that one of the factors in every pitch that I was involved with was expertise (and not just that, but MASTERY) of patent law. I can't think of a better way to become fully immersed in patent law than clerking at the Fed. Cir. As a junior litigator, you are going to waste a lot of time doing menial tasks (even at an elite boutique, which sounds like where you'll be going). Somebody has to do the grunt work, and it's going to be you. As a clerk, however, you would be constantly focusing on (usually) interesting and challenging questions of law that will build a knowledge base that is difficult, if not impossible, to develop outside of a clerkship context as a junior attorney in the same amount of time. I'm not saying that you can't become an expert without a clerkship; I'm just saying that becoming an expert is expedited with a Fed. Cir. clerkship.

Being an expert in your field is a prerequisite for making partner at any firm, so it's in your best interest to do so (even if you think making partner won't be difficult--which I seriously doubt; but whatever, I don't know where you'll be working).

[Desert Fox]

[Anonymous User]

I appreciate all the responses here. I understand that the clerkship is a great credential, but I'm still struggling with the price tag. Can the resume line really be worth $200k over a 15 year career? Logistically, how does that work?

[84651846190]

I appreciate all the responses here. I understand that the clerkship is a great credential, but I'm still struggling with the price tag. Can the resume line really be worth $200k over a 15 year career? Logistically, how does that work?

I lot of this depends on what kind of a career you want to have. If you want to stay in the big-ticket IP lit fight for 10+ years, it's probably worth it. If not, maybe not. If you're looking to jump ship for something more chill after 3-5 years, a Fed. Cir. clerkship might be a bad idea if you're only concerned with the money.

[jbagelboy]

I appreciate all the responses here. I understand that the clerkship is a great credential, but I'm still struggling with the price tag. Can the resume line really be worth $200k over a 15 year career? Logistically, how does that work?

I guess I don't agree with your math, nor do I think $200k in potential income actualized over 15 years is really that important (compared to, for example, a non-dischargeable debt obligation). So on both ends I'm having trouble seeing where you're coming from.