HLS EIP 2016 Forum

[Anonymous User]

So, bidding Boston Lit with 4H.
I'm kind of out of firms on my bid list with 17. Strong ties to area. Should I be concerned/tossing in other firms? OCS seems to suggest 20-30 firms...
Would DC be doable with my grades?
Also, what's the consensus on just being honest and saying I want to do lit in interviews?

[Single-Malt-Liquor]

So, bidding Boston Lit with 4H.
I'm kind of out of firms on my bid list with 17. Strong ties to area. Should I be concerned/tossing in other firms? OCS seems to suggest 20-30 firms...
Would DC be doable with my grades?
Also, what's the consensus on just being honest and saying I want to do lit in interviews?

You can toss in few NY bids. If nothing else it'll help confirm that you don't want to live in new york.

4H puts you in the running at all the Boston firms, it's going to come down to your interviewing, speaking of which...It's totally fine to declare that you want lit, actually, and this goes for everyone, you're much better declaring whether you want lit or transaction than sitting on the fence, most firms dont really like when people split departments. Also, declaring forces you to come up with a compelling story as to why you want to do that particular thing. In coming up with that story, think of what a litigator/transaction person does each day and why those things appeal to you. Tie it to past experiences and you're golden.

[radio1nowhere]

As far as bidlist ranking strategy, is the general rule to just list in descending order from hardest-to-get-interviews-with?

I guess if you have I-really-want-this-firm bids they should also go first

[TripTrip]

I guess if you have I-really-want-this-firm bids they should also go first

This is the key. Bid the firms you actually want to work for first, because it would be silly to end up missing out on an interview with a firm you want because the system saw your schedule was already full that day.

If you're apathetic about the difference between a group of firms (which you might be for half your list), then sure bid those in descending order of bid-to-offer ratio.

[foxes]

I guess if you have I-really-want-this-firm bids they should also go first

This is the key. Bid the firms you actually want to work for first, because it would be silly to end up missing out on an interview with a firm you want because the system saw your schedule was already full that day.

If you're apathetic about the difference between a group of firms (which you might be for half your list), then sure bid those in descending order of bid-to-offer ratio.

maybe a dumb q, but i really dont have firms that i feel strongly about wanting...they all seem kind of fungible at this point, or maybe im doing my research wrong? if i dont have strong feelings, would it be ok just to bid in descending order of bid to offer ratio?

[wwwcol]

I guess if you have I-really-want-this-firm bids they should also go first

This is the key. Bid the firms you actually want to work for first, because it would be silly to end up missing out on an interview with a firm you want because the system saw your schedule was already full that day.

If you're apathetic about the difference between a group of firms (which you might be for half your list), then sure bid those in descending order of bid-to-offer ratio.

maybe a dumb q, but i really dont have firms that i feel strongly about wanting...they all seem kind of fungible at this point, or maybe im doing my research wrong? if i dont have strong feelings, would it be ok just to bid in descending order of bid to offer ratio?

You're not really doing anything wrong. The process is opaque as fuck from the outside -- it's very hard to tell which firms do what. If you post your interests you'll probably get some guidance here, but if you're not comfortable doing that, I think the best resource to try differentiating firms is the Chambers guide (the rankings are helpful, but Chambers also has narratives describing each firm's practice area strengths).

Your bid strategy would work fine but you may also want to consider CB and offer numbers, e.g. if an office has a very high CB---> offer ratio, may be worthwhile making sure you get an interview w/ them. No magic formula though so do whatever feels right

[Anonymous User]

Straight Ps here. Thoughts on bidding CA firms?

Also, thoughts on the bid distribution? Are "safer firms" V40? Or more like V70. Odds of pulling V20?

Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

Is there any data on differences in EIP results based on diversity criteria? Is OCI similar to law school admissions in terms of criteria and "boosts" or is it broader/narrower (for example I've heard that non-URM minority status may be considered by some law firms, more so than by law schools)?

[foxes]

I guess if you have I-really-want-this-firm bids they should also go first

This is the key. Bid the firms you actually want to work for first, because it would be silly to end up missing out on an interview with a firm you want because the system saw your schedule was already full that day.

If you're apathetic about the difference between a group of firms (which you might be for half your list), then sure bid those in descending order of bid-to-offer ratio.

maybe a dumb q, but i really dont have firms that i feel strongly about wanting...they all seem kind of fungible at this point, or maybe im doing my research wrong? if i dont have strong feelings, would it be ok just to bid in descending order of bid to offer ratio?

You're not really doing anything wrong. The process is opaque as fuck from the outside -- it's very hard to tell which firms do what. If you post your interests you'll probably get some guidance here, but if you're not comfortable doing that, I think the best resource to try differentiating firms is the Chambers guide (the rankings are helpful, but Chambers also has narratives describing each firm's practice area strengths).

Your bid strategy would work fine but you may also want to consider CB and offer numbers, e.g. if an office has a very high CB---> offer ratio, may be worthwhile making sure you get an interview w/ them. No magic formula though so do whatever feels right

Thank you so much for this. As a follow up, how much research should we really be doing per firm for interviews? Is it enough to know about strong practice areas and maybe some recent news? E. G. I heard your firm has a great X practice, and I'm interested in X because of Y. I heard that you recently did Z. Etc. Maybe throw in some stuff about how I like that firms city?

Or should we be doing something a lot more in depth? I'm planning on using all 35 bids so I'm just trying to figure out how much time I should put into each firms research.

[spyke123]

I think the general strategy should be to maximize interviews/offers unless you have killer grades/great interviewer. Then of course you can f it and bid on any firms you want. As others have mentioned, its really hard to have any strong opinions on any of the firms at this point. So yeah, do take a serious look at cb/offer, bid/interview ratios etc. Ppl at hls do strike out.

[TripTrip]

Is there any data on differences in EIP results based on diversity criteria? Is OCI similar to law school admissions in terms of criteria and "boosts" or is it broader/narrower (for example I've heard that non-URM minority status may be considered by some law firms, more so than by law schools)?

Somewhat, but it's a little nuanced. Law firms often have diversity-specific recruitment. But since law school admissions already have a strong URM focus (not in absolute terms, but unfortunately that's not the point here), the difference is tough to pin down. At most, add a couple of virtual Hs to your transcript.

Thank you so much for this. As a follow up, how much research should we really be doing per firm for interviews? Is it enough to know about strong practice areas and maybe some recent news? E. G. I heard your firm has a great X practice, and I'm interested in X because of Y. I heard that you recently did Z. Etc. Maybe throw in some stuff about how I like that firms city?

Or should we be doing something a lot more in depth? I'm planning on using all 35 bids so I'm just trying to figure out how much time I should put into each firms research.

For the screeners yes. They don't expect you to know much about their firm for those. Just make sure you don't walk in thinking they're in a city they're not or say you're interested in a practice group they don't have (both of which I've done, btw). You won't have time to do much else unless you're writing flash cards the week before. If you have that kind of time, it would be better to work on your resume anecdotes and generic firm questions.

[Anonymous User]

I think the general strategy should be to maximize interviews/offers unless you have killer grades/great interviewer. Then of course you can f it and bid on any firms you want. As others have mentioned, its really hard to have any strong opinions on any of the firms at this point. So yeah, do take a serious look at cb/offer, bid/interview ratios etc. Ppl at hls do strike out.

FWIW, this is bad advice. It assumes that all biglaw jobs / firms are fundamentally interchangeable, and they're not, especially when it comes to transactional work. The critical strategy is to maximize interviews at the pool of firms that balance a reasonable chance of giving you an offer with desirability, based on your professional interests. If you have, say, a 50/50 shot at getting an offer at firms like Latham/Weil - there are like 5 other similar firms with similar grade requirements and similarly strong transactional practices, and your goal should be to ensure you interview with all of them. 0.5^6 = 1% chance of striking out.

People strike out not because they failed to maximize the number of interviews, but because they misjudged their attractiveness as a candidate and so interviewed at places that they had no material chance of getting an offer from. Fortunately, that shouldn't happen to you. You know your grades, so that takes care of one prong; if you have any doubts about your interviewing skills, you should be seeking out real feedback (i.e., not feedback from someone who's going to whitewash your failings) ASAP and working to fix those.

But honestly, most people who have real issues with interview skills know it going into EIP. If you're in that group, you need to bid accordingly, just like someone whose grades aren't good.

[spyke123]

I think the general strategy should be to maximize interviews/offers unless you have killer grades/great interviewer. Then of course you can f it and bid on any firms you want. As others have mentioned, its really hard to have any strong opinions on any of the firms at this point. So yeah, do take a serious look at cb/offer, bid/interview ratios etc. Ppl at hls do strike out.

FWIW, this is bad advice. It assumes that all biglaw jobs / firms are fundamentally interchangeable, and they're not, especially when it comes to transactional work. The critical strategy is to maximize interviews at the pool of firms that balance a reasonable chance of giving you an offer with desirability, based on your professional interests. If you have, say, a 50/50 shot at getting an offer at firms like Latham/Weil - there are like 5 other similar firms with similar grade requirements and similarly strong transactional practices, and your goal should be to ensure you interview with all of them. 0.5^6 = 1% chance of striking out.

People strike out not because they failed to maximize the number of interviews, but because they misjudged their attractiveness as a candidate and so interviewed at places that they had no material chance of getting an offer from. Fortunately, that shouldn't happen to you. You know your grades, so that takes care of one prong; if you have any doubts about your interviewing skills, you should be seeking out real feedback (i.e., not feedback from someone who's going to whitewash your failings) ASAP and working to fix those.

But honestly, most people who have real issues with interview skills know it going into EIP. If you're in that group, you need to bid accordingly, just like someone whose grades aren't good.

I am failing to see how your post discredits my post.

First,I did not say you should completely ignore your professional interests. Obviously if know for sure you want to do X and a firm excels in X, then you should bid on them. But I still stand by my post that a majority of rising 2Ls probably doesn't really know what they want to do. Most might know whether they want lit or trans but between cap markets or M&A? finance or fund formation? probably not. So it makes sense to be more concerned about maximizing interviews/offers. Your practice area interest may change anyways during the summer and once you start.

Second, I never said you should just focus on maximizing the number of interviews. I said bid smart to maximize the number of interviews and OFFERs i.e. look at cb/offer ratios. That includes, as you suggested, not bidding on firms where you have no material chance of getting an offer. Having interviews with all V30 will not help if you have an LP.

Third, maybe it's different now but when I did EIP, the OCS refused to release any information regarding grade cutoffs/grade distribution for offers. So, it was actually quite difficult to figure out whether you had a "50/50" shot at Latham/Weil. Having said that, from my experience, many firms seem to be willing to dig pretty deep into the class. A lot of this process is luck, especially at HLS, where grades seem to be less of a concern to the firms. So if you are around median (2-6Hs), the correct strategy may be to maximize the number of interviews.

[Anonymous User]

Would appreciate critique/feedback on my bidlist:
2H/8P, Interested in NY Corporate
Strong Interviewer (based on feedback from recent mock interviews with firms) and interesting semi-relevant work experience.

Order of bids is based on a combination of wanting to work there and percentage of bids from past years that obtained interviews. Really only interested in working at the first 20 on this list, everything after that is just diligence. Would rather get 17-18 interviews from my top 20 than end up with 25 interviews by bidding more "strategically".

1 Debevoise & Plimpton
New York, NY

2 Weil Gotshal & Manges
New York, NY

3 Cahill Gordon & Reindel
New York, NY

4 sidley austin llp
New York, NY

5 Proskauer Rose
New York, NY

6 Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
New York, NY

7 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
New York, NY

8 Shearman & Sterling
New York, NY

9 Cravath, Swaine & Moore
New York, NY

10 Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy
New York, NY

11 Schulte Roth & Zabel
New York, NY

12 Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton
New York, NY

13 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
New York, NY

14 Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, NY

15 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
New York, NY

16 Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
New York, NY

17 Ropes & Gray
New York, NY

18 Kirkland & Ellis
New York, NY - Corporate

19 Covington & Burling LLP
New York, NY

20 Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson
New York, NY

21 Latham & Watkins
New York, NY

22 WilmerHale
New York, NY

23 Vinson & Elkins
New York, NY

24 White & Case
New York, NY

25 Freshfields
New York, NY

26 Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
New York, NY

27 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
New York, NY

28 O'Melveny & Myers
New York, NY

29 mayer brown llp
New York, NY

[Anonymous User]

Would appreciate critique/feedback on my bidlist:
2H/8P, Interested in NY Corporate
Strong Interviewer (based on feedback from recent mock interviews with firms) and interesting semi-relevant work experience.

Order of bids is based on a combination of wanting to work there and percentage of bids from past years that obtained interviews. Really only interested in working at the first 20 on this list, everything after that is just diligence. Would rather get 17-18 interviews from my top 20 than end up with 25 interviews by bidding more "strategically".

1 Debevoise & Plimpton
New York, NY

2 Weil Gotshal & Manges
New York, NY

3 Cahill Gordon & Reindel
New York, NY

4 Sidley Austin LLP
New York, NY

5 Proskauer Rose
New York, NY

6 Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
New York, NY

7 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
New York, NY

8 Shearman & Sterling
New York, NY

9 Cravath, Swaine & Moore
New York, NY

10 Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy
New York, NY

11 Schulte Roth & Zabel
New York, NY

12 Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton
New York, NY

13 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
New York, NY

14 Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, NY

15 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
New York, NY

16 Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
New York, NY

17 Ropes & Gray
New York, NY

18 Kirkland & Ellis
New York, NY - Corporate

19 Covington & Burling LLP
New York, NY

20 Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson
New York, NY

21 Latham & Watkins
New York, NY

22 WilmerHale
New York, NY

23 Vinson & Elkins
New York, NY

24 White & Case
New York, NY

25 Freshfields
New York, NY

26 Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
New York, NY

27 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
New York, NY

28 O'Melveny & Myers
New York, NY

29 Mayer Brown LLP
New York, NY

Cahill, your #3 firm, doesn't really do any corporate law.

[Anonymous User]

This is a dumb question, but if I'm targeting 3 markets and the firm has offices I'm interested in all 3, do I need to bid them only once or for all the markets?

(I know targeting more than 2 is not advised but I've talked to OCS and it makes sense and is doable given my goals and circumstances)

[wwwcol]

Would appreciate critique/feedback on my bidlist:
2H/8P, Interested in NY Corporate
Strong Interviewer (based on feedback from recent mock interviews with firms) and interesting semi-relevant work experience.

Order of bids is based on a combination of wanting to work there and percentage of bids from past years that obtained interviews. Really only interested in working at the first 20 on this list, everything after that is just diligence. Would rather get 17-18 interviews from my top 20 than end up with 25 interviews by bidding more "strategically".

1 Debevoise & Plimpton
New York, NY

2 Weil Gotshal & Manges
New York, NY

3 Cahill Gordon & Reindel
New York, NY

4 Sidley Austin LLP
New York, NY

5 Proskauer Rose
New York, NY

6 Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
New York, NY

7 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
New York, NY

8 Shearman & Sterling
New York, NY

9 Cravath, Swaine & Moore
New York, NY

10 Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy
New York, NY

11 Schulte Roth & Zabel
New York, NY

12 Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton
New York, NY

13 Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
New York, NY

14 Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP
New York, NY

15 Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher
New York, NY

16 Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
New York, NY

17 Ropes & Gray
New York, NY

18 Kirkland & Ellis
New York, NY - Corporate

19 Covington & Burling LLP
New York, NY

20 Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson
New York, NY

21 Latham & Watkins
New York, NY

22 WilmerHale
New York, NY

23 Vinson & Elkins
New York, NY

24 White & Case
New York, NY

25 Freshfields
New York, NY

26 Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft
New York, NY

27 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld
New York, NY

28 O'Melveny & Myers
New York, NY

29 Mayer Brown LLP
New York, NY

Cahill, your #3 firm, doesn't really do any corporate law.

Paul Weiss is also a strange top 15 bid if you want to do corporate. A couple more firms on that list do more lit than Corp even in NYC. Probably worth going back through and researching which offices do what more thoroughly

[Anonymous User]

If I have six Hs and want to bid exclusively on DC, how many safeties should I have? And what firms would be considered safeties? I'm only interested in litigation.

[Anonymous User]

I have 4 Hs and want to apply to top firms in NY. Not sure about how to differentiate between the firms, what the best way to prep is, and how to prepare for interviews. Thoughts?

[Anonymous User]

This is a dumb question, but if I'm targeting 3 markets and the firm has offices I'm interested in all 3, do I need to bid them only once or for all the markets?

(I know targeting more than 2 is not advised but I've talked to OCS and it makes sense and is doable given my goals and circumstances)

I think it really depends on the firm. I know some firms will give you an interview for various offices even if you only bid on one. It really depends and you need to know what each firms policy/structure is.

[TripTrip]

Is there any data on differences in EIP results based on diversity criteria? Is OCI similar to law school admissions in terms of criteria and "boosts" or is it broader/narrower (for example I've heard that non-URM minority status may be considered by some law firms, more so than by law schools)?

Yeah I'm looking for this info also. A friend of mine told me the only way to get this is to use a coach or consulting service or to find friends at each of these firms and ask. Have you found anything yet?

It's not as significant as for law school admissions, from what I have seen (I'm not comparing apples to apples here, but that's the sense I've gotten from comparing my data from what I know from MyLSN).

In practical terms: for any diversity criteria you think is valuable to a firm, add a virtual H to your transcript. If that doesn't change which firms you were going to bid on, just enjoy the extra callback or two.

[lawlorbust]

Cahill, your #3 firm, doesn't really do any corporate law.

... what?

Paul Weiss is also a strange top 15 bid if you want to do corporate. A couple more firms on that list do more lit than Corp even in NYC. Probably worth going back through and researching which offices do what more thoroughly

TBF, speaking specifically to PW, they do have a very solid corporate practice, it just tends to be overshadowed by their lit department. Scrolling really quickly down the poster's list, it's not clear to me that Wilmer / OMM / Freshfields, etc. would be better shops in that regard.

[Anonymous User]

For firms like Fish & Richardson, do their SA offers tend to be to those who work in hard IP with STEM backgrounds or do they also take people with a background in soft IP?

[Anonymous User]

Cahill, your #3 firm, doesn't really do any corporate law.

... what?

My bad, I forgot this thread had people in it who didn't know what corporate law meant. Cahill does not do corporate law. You are confusing corporate law with transactional law. They do not mean the same thing. It overlaps at most places. But not at Cahill, bc their transactional practice is almost entirely bank-side cap markets. HTH.

[Anonymous User]

For firms like Fish & Richardson, do their SA offers tend to be to those who work in hard IP with STEM backgrounds or do they also take people with a background in soft IP?

This is what they say on CSM, take it how you will:

Scientific or technical background preferred for IP litigation (required for patent prosecution practice only).

We require excellent academic credentials and superior writing ability.

Please bring transcript to the interview.

My sense is that Fish might take people with non-tech backgrounds, but it's not really the place to be for soft IP. For example they're not on Chambers' list: http://www.chambersandpartners.com/1278 ... torial/5/1