Which matters most to patent law? Major or experience ? Forum

[jrwhitedog]

This question is for IP law, I have a master of engineering degree in electrical and computer engineering in Canada but no working experience, would that still make me a potential attractive candidate upon graduation ?

[tbird]

Yes, from what I can tell firms still prefer EE/CS majors, especially for litigation. Work experience is a plus but not having any isn't a deal breaker. Don't do terrible in law school and you should have no problem getting interviews.

[jrwhitedog]

Yes, from what I can tell firms still prefer EE/CS majors, especially for litigation. Work experience is a plus but not having any isn't a deal breaker. Don't do terrible in law school and you should have no problem getting interviews.

Really? I thought major matters only when it comes to prosecution.

[tbird]

I would tend to agree that it might make a bigger difference for prosecution, but especially for life sciences where a Ph.D. seems to be required. But it still seems to be very important for lit. Perhaps in the golden days firms would just throw bodies at their patent lit. departments regardless of whether those bodies had technical backgrounds. Now I think firms are a little more selective about bringing in new associates, but that's just my opinion.

I had a few buddies that were EE or CS with good grades that had like 10 interviews at Loyola and got multiple summer offers. Trolling through LinkedIn and other places I still see preference for those majors. You should have lots of options if you do well.

[jrwhitedog]

I would tend to agree that it might make a bigger difference for prosecution, but especially for life sciences where a Ph.D. seems to be required. But it still seems to be very important for lit. Perhaps in the golden days firms would just throw bodies at their patent lit. departments regardless of whether those bodies had technical backgrounds. Now I think firms are a little more selective about bringing in new associates, but that's just my opinion.

I had a few buddies that were EE or CS with good grades that had like 10 interviews at Loyola and got multiple summer offers. Trolling through LinkedIn and other places I still see preference for those majors. You should have lots of options if you do well.

Thanks for the reply, my major concern is whether a master degree in EE/CS without any working experience would suffice for a patent law career.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for the reply, my major concern is whether a master degree in EE/CS without any working experience would suffice for a patent law career.

Not in patent work myself but many of my good friends from law school are. Work experience is really not necessary from what I saw. 4/5 kids I knew with EE backgrounds didn't have any prior work experience, and are now all doing biglaw patent lit. What mattered most for these people weren't even their backgrounds, it was their school + their grades (as it is with pretty much everyone). Overall patent people have easier time finding jobs, but don't count on that entirely overshadowing the importance of getting into a good school and getting good grades.

It's hard to try and figure out this early(0L?) but I would really try find out if you want to do patent litigation vs patent prosecution. The work is different, the degree of specialization is different, etc. I have heard recently of some patent pros people switching over to doing PTAB trial styleish proceedings too, if that's a practice that might interest you.

Edit: People actually in patent law may disagree but I don't even necessarily think a masters degree is all that necessary in patent lit. So having one provides a boost in itself.

[totesTheGoat]

Thanks for the reply, my major concern is whether a master degree in EE/CS without any working experience would suffice for a patent law career.

It will suffice, but anybody with work experience will have a better shot at the job than you. Generally, most firms are looking for the ideal candidate to have 2-5 years work experience or a PhD. If you go the lit route, you don't need the work experience, but many firms still prefer work experience over K-JD. In lit, one big point to hiring a EE/CS is to get somebody who is fluent in the technologies used in industry. Somebody without work experience isn't filling that need. However, what usually happens is that the choice is between a candidate with an EE/CS background and a bunch of humanities majors, and the EE/CS wins 9.9/10 times.

You'll probably find somebody to hire you, but you'd do your law prospects a big favor by working for a few years (or getting a PhD).

Edit: People actually in patent law may disagree but I don't even necessarily think a masters degree is all that necessary in patent lit. So having one provides a boost in itself.

I do want to address this. A technical background isn't necessary for patent lit. I know patent litigators with humanities backgrounds. However, the firms are hiring the best candidate they can get, and so the more experience you have (to a reasonable extent), the better off you are. The question for OP is how competitive they want their resume to be. Does OP want to compete for the best patent jobs? If so, work experience is going to be more important. If OP is happy with any patent job, work experience is superfluous.

[jrwhitedog]

Thanks for the reply, my major concern is whether a master degree in EE/CS without any working experience would suffice for a patent law career.

It will suffice, but anybody with work experience will have a better shot at the job than you. Generally, most firms are looking for the ideal candidate to have 2-5 years work experience or a PhD. If you go the lit route, you don't need the work experience, but many firms still prefer work experience over K-JD. In lit, one big point to hiring a EE/CS is to get somebody who is fluent in the technologies used in industry. Somebody without work experience isn't filling that need. However, what usually happens is that the choice is between a candidate with an EE/CS background and a bunch of humanities majors, and the EE/CS wins 9.9/10 times.

You'll probably find somebody to hire you, but you'd do your law prospects a big favor by working for a few years (or getting a PhD).

Edit: People actually in patent law may disagree but I don't even necessarily think a masters degree is all that necessary in patent lit. So having one provides a boost in itself.

I do want to address this. A technical background isn't necessary for patent lit. I know patent litigators with humanities backgrounds. However, the firms are hiring the best candidate they can get, and so the more experience you have (to a reasonable extent), the better off you are. The question for OP is how competitive they want their resume to be. Does OP want to compete for the best patent jobs? If so, work experience is going to be more important. If OP is happy with any patent job, work experience is superfluous.

Thanks, well for a guy who's about to get into law school this year, there's nothing I can do about my zero working experience.Without the most competitive resume but a master degree in EE/CS, would it still be easier for me find a job in patent law? What about patent prosecution ?

[patentlitigatrix]

Can you read and understand code and circuit diagrams? What languages do you know? Any or all of C++, Java/Javascript, SQL, PHP, Python?

[jrwhitedog]

Can you read and understand code and circuit diagrams? What languages do you know? Any or all of C++, Java/Javascript, SQL, PHP, Python?

Not sure about circuit diagrams, but I'm an OCPJP(Java 1.6) and a CCNA, do these help ?

[totesTheGoat]

Thanks, well for a guy who's about to get into law school this year, there's nothing I can do about my zero working experience.Without the most competitive resume but a master degree in EE/CS, would it still be easier for me find a job in patent law? What about patent prosecution ?

Yes, assuming you do decently in law school (at or around median), you're going to be able to find a job. You just may be closed out of some of the "top" patent jobs.

Unsolicited advice: Take and pass the patent bar before you go to law school. You'll thank me in a few years.

[redtalun]

Thanks, well for a guy who's about to get into law school this year, there's nothing I can do about my zero working experience.Without the most competitive resume but a master degree in EE/CS, would it still be easier for me find a job in patent law? What about patent prosecution ?

Yes, assuming you do decently in law school (at or around median), you're going to be able to find a job. You just may be closed out of some of the "top" patent jobs.

Unsolicited advice: Take and pass the patent bar before you go to law school. You'll thank me in a few years.

totes, could you elaborate on why it's better to take patent bar before lawl school? I was actually glad I took it in law school because (1) my firm paid for it and (2) I got independent study credit for taking the patent bar (didn't even need to pass, technically).

[totesTheGoat]

Full disclosure: I haven't taken the patent bar yet, and I'm graduating in December.

First, it shows a commitment to patent law, which isn't super important once you graduate, but is helpful if you're looking for a job or internship during school, especially during the school year. I don't know about y'all, but I was still a little neurotic about my job prospects before I got my first IP law job. Having a reg. number is extra insurance to make sure that your resume ends up at the top of the stack. It also unlocks a small pay bump if you get a school year job.

Second, it's one less thing to stress about once you graduate. I'm currently stressing about having to take the MPRE, patent bar, and state bar all within the next 12 months.

Third, with prosecution work it's nice to be able to call up the examiner without an attorney having to babysit you. It may not be an issue (since the attorney will want to mentor you and there are power of attorney issues), but I had a situation where an attorney had an emergency during my internship, and I was stuck going door to door looking for somebody with a reg. number to babysit me during the examiner interview. Also, at my day job it would be really nice to be able to schedule up an interview and save the billables of a partner/sr. associate having to be on the call with me.

Finally, the patent bar doesn't require the kind of studying that the LSAT or the state bar requires, so it's a great thing to work on during a relaxing pre-1L summer. You get something accomplished, but you're not going to spend every waking hour preparing for it.

The big downside is that many firms will pay for you to take and study for it, so you're out $500-$1500 if you take it before law school. Personally, I would have made that money back by now (and then some), but YMMV.

[patentlitigatrix]

Can you read and understand code and circuit diagrams? What languages do you know? Any or all of C++, Java/Javascript, SQL, PHP, Python?

Not sure about circuit diagrams, but I'm an OCPJP(Java 1.6) and a CCNA, do these help ?

So I am coming at this from the perspective of a litigator with an EECS background (including work experience). What we really care about for someone with a EECS background is if someone can read code/understand the technology and then explain it those on the team without a technical background. So certifications are nice, but most people won't know what those are. But even humanities ppl who do patent lit will have heard of Java though, for example.

Can you share what law school you are going to, or a range?

[hurldes]

I think you should work for a year or two as an engineer before going to law school. It isn't necessary to get a job but it will help a lot and it can't hurt you. It'll also help you figure out if maybe you like being an engineer before you take three years off to go to law school. I went straight from EE undergrad to law school and I think it was a mistake not to work as an engineer for at least a year.

[checkers]

Regarding the patent bar and when to take it, if at all possible you should have it done before you do Loyola/OCI. Some people are mentioning how the firm reimbursement saved them a few hundred dollars, but that's really peanuts when you consider the big picture. Ask yourself, how much would you pay to have every IP interviewer say "I see you passed the patent bar. That's impressive to have done it so early." It gives you instant credibility that you are serious about IP, and by extension serious about working for X firm that does IP. This advice applies to both lit and pros. Considering how much money you'll be paying for tuition, don't put off taking the patent bar just so you can save some money. That would be extremely penny-wise pound-foolish.

I didn't read the above posts closely, so forgive me if I'm arguing against a straw man here. I just don't want 0Ls to get the wrong idea that passing the exam is on par with saving a few dollars.

[Spartan_Alum_12]

Like most here have said, it helps but it's not necessary. If I were you I would work as an engineer if you have a genuine interest of doing so or are on the fence about an engineering career, but I wouldn't do so if you know you don't want to be an engineer and just want to boost your patent law resume.

[Spartan_Alum_12]

Regarding the patent bar and when to take it, if at all possible you should have it done before you do Loyola/OCI. Some people are mentioning how the firm reimbursement saved them a few hundred dollars, but that's really peanuts when you consider the big picture. Ask yourself, how much would you pay to have every IP interviewer say "I see you passed the patent bar. That's impressive to have done it so early." It gives you instant credibility that you are serious about IP, and by extension serious about working for X firm that does IP. This advice applies to both lit and pros. Considering how much money you'll be paying for tuition, don't put off taking the patent bar just so you can save some money. That would be extremely penny-wise pound-foolish.

I didn't read the above posts closely, so forgive me if I'm arguing against a straw man here. I just don't want 0Ls to get the wrong idea that passing the exam is on par with saving a few dollars.

I agree, especially if the OP has the time to study and take it before law school. The spring/summer before law school was the perfect time to study for and take the exam. During law school (including summers), it would have been a pain to fit in patent bar prep with everything else going on (studying, working, interviewing, extra curriculars). Not to mention the benefits to Loyola/OCI you mentioned above. The extra money spent is worth it, but that's just my opinion.

[totesTheGoat]

The spring/summer before law school was the perfect time to study for and take the exam. During law school (including summers), it would have been a pain to fit in patent bar prep with everything else going on (studying, working, interviewing, extra curriculars).

[redtalun]

Regarding the patent bar and when to take it, if at all possible you should have it done before you do Loyola/OCI. Some people are mentioning how the firm reimbursement saved them a few hundred dollars, but that's really peanuts when you consider the big picture. Ask yourself, how much would you pay to have every IP interviewer say "I see you passed the patent bar. That's impressive to have done it so early." It gives you instant credibility that you are serious about IP, and by extension serious about working for X firm that does IP. This advice applies to both lit and pros. Considering how much money you'll be paying for tuition, don't put off taking the patent bar just so you can save some money. That would be extremely penny-wise pound-foolish.

I didn't read the above posts closely, so forgive me if I'm arguing against a straw man here. I just don't want 0Ls to get the wrong idea that passing the exam is on par with saving a few dollars.

I never meant to suggest that the $$$ should be a reason to hold off on getting a Reg #. Rather, my impression from talking to local attorneys was that a Reg # was a nice-to-have, but not that big of a consideration for hiring in the grand scheme of things.

Of course, if your choices as a 0L are between PLI and playing tetris all summer, by all means study for the patent bar.

[jrwhitedog]

Can you read and understand code and circuit diagrams? What languages do you know? Any or all of C++, Java/Javascript, SQL, PHP, Python?

Not sure about circuit diagrams, but I'm an OCPJP(Java 1.6) and a CCNA, do these help ?

So I am coming at this from the perspective of a litigator with an EECS background (including work experience). What we really care about for someone with a EECS background is if someone can read code/understand the technology and then explain it those on the team without a technical background. So certifications are nice, but most people won't know what those are. But even humanities ppl who do patent lit will have heard of Java though, for example.

Can you share what law school you are going to, or a range?

I have applied to UIUC, George Mason,UC hastings and American U cause I love DC.

[jrwhitedog]

I think you should work for a year or two as an engineer before going to law school. It isn't necessary to get a job but it will help a lot and it can't hurt you. It'll also help you figure out if maybe you like being an engineer before you take three years off to go to law school. I went straight from EE undergrad to law school and I think it was a mistake not to work as an engineer for at least a year.

Well I'm pretty sure I don't want to be an engineer, but thanks for the advice any way .

[Abbie Doobie]

I think you should work for a year or two as an engineer before going to law school. It isn't necessary to get a job but it will help a lot and it can't hurt you. It'll also help you figure out if maybe you like being an engineer before you take three years off to go to law school. I went straight from EE undergrad to law school and I think it was a mistake not to work as an engineer for at least a year.

Well I'm pretty sure I don't want to be an engineer, but thanks for the advice any way .

why not? you don't like the idea of making a decent amount of money for relatively little hours?

[jrwhitedog]

I think you should work for a year or two as an engineer before going to law school. It isn't necessary to get a job but it will help a lot and it can't hurt you. It'll also help you figure out if maybe you like being an engineer before you take three years off to go to law school. I went straight from EE undergrad to law school and I think it was a mistake not to work as an engineer for at least a year.

Well I'm pretty sure I don't want to be an engineer, but thanks for the advice any way .

why not? you don't like the idea of making a decent amount of money for relatively little hours?

Well I'd say I'm not really the engineer type of person, and seems some of my engineer friends who make around 120k still work close to 50 hours a week.

[checkers]

Well I'd say I'm not really the engineer type of person, and seems some of my engineer friends who make around 120k still work close to 50 hours a week.

That doesn't sound bad at all. Are you saying that 120k isn't a lot of money or that 50 hours a week is a lot of hours, or both? In law, 50 hours a week will be near the low end of what you work, and there's a sizable probability that you won't even make 120k doing that.