Irell Thread Forum

[Anonymous User]

Looking to get some insight into Irell as I'm strongly considering accepting an offer. Obviously, they are in many ways a patent lit boutique at this point, but it still seems like they do some other lit as well. I liked the people, culture, etc. a lot and am very interested in getting experience early on (esp trial exp), both of which it has over the other firm I'm considering (satellite office of a V10). Fit is important to me as I'd rather not work somewhere I want to jump ship ASAP. Aside from the refocusing/partner loss, which seems not to have affected their financials too much if last year's bonuses are any indication, are there any red flags?

This might be a silly concern, but I notice their female partnership stat is fairly bad- 13%. Is there anyone who can speak to this? Does it reflect something I might not be seeing about the firm?

Other primary concern is getting pigeonholed into IP in the event I don't LOVE it long-term and want to lateral elsewhere. I want to think that the experience will translate fine- drafting motions, trial work, depositions, etc., but it's hard to really gauge this as a law student. I want to stay in SoCal & they are still in the SoCal V10, which seems like further evidence exit opportunities will be fine, but again, I'm not really sure how much stock to put into that.

[jacky9]

I accepted an offer at Irell. I don’t know a lot but pm me and we can have a proper convo.

[Anonymous User]

Caveat: I was recently there for a summer, so my experience is limited.

The people appeared to treat each other well and all the associates I got to know seemed to have at least one or two friends at the office, so overall the culture struck me as at least decent. Meaningful early experience seemed like a pretty real thing too. The hours were long by normal workplace standards but I think they were reasonable by BL standards. I'd ultimately recommend the firm given what I know about your priorities.

That said, I'd be leery about the notion you're going to get to do much outside of patent lit. Maybe some trademark work is still around, but IP (and specifically mostly patents) seemed to be all that was left from the recent big wave of departures. Can't speak to how much that narrowness would hurt you for future career moves not involving IP – I imagine you're right that it's a trade-off with better opportunities for substantive work experience, though that's just speculation. And obviously only you can judge how interesting IP work sounds, and how much that matters.

I'm a guy, so add another grain of salt to my take on the experience of women in the office. But I didn't see anything that felt weird with how people treated each other, and I was friends with a few of the female summers and I don't remember them saying they were hearing anything worrying on that front. Of course, take those data points for what they're worth.

[Anonymous User]

Looking to get some insight into Irell as I'm strongly considering accepting an offer. Obviously, they are in many ways a patent lit boutique at this point, but it still seems like they do some other lit as well. I liked the people, culture, etc. a lot and am very interested in getting experience early on (esp trial exp), both of which it has over the other firm I'm considering (satellite office of a V10). Fit is important to me as I'd rather not work somewhere I want to jump ship ASAP. Aside from the refocusing/partner loss, which seems not to have affected their financials too much if last year's bonuses are any indication, are there any red flags?

This might be a silly concern, but I notice their female partnership stat is fairly bad- 13%. Is there anyone who can speak to this? Does it reflect something I might not be seeing about the firm?

Other primary concern is getting pigeonholed into IP in the event I don't LOVE it long-term and want to lateral elsewhere. I want to think that the experience will translate fine- drafting motions, trial work, depositions, etc., but it's hard to really gauge this as a law student. I want to stay in SoCal & they are still in the SoCal V10, which seems like further evidence exit opportunities will be fine, but again, I'm not really sure how much stock to put into that.

Dude, Irell basically only does patent lit. If you don’t want to get pigeonholed into IP you shouldn’t go there

[Anonymous User]

Looking to get some insight into Irell as I'm strongly considering accepting an offer. Obviously, they are in many ways a patent lit boutique at this point, but it still seems like they do some other lit as well. I liked the people, culture, etc. a lot and am very interested in getting experience early on (esp trial exp), both of which it has over the other firm I'm considering (satellite office of a V10). Fit is important to me as I'd rather not work somewhere I want to jump ship ASAP. Aside from the refocusing/partner loss, which seems not to have affected their financials too much if last year's bonuses are any indication, are there any red flags?

This might be a silly concern, but I notice their female partnership stat is fairly bad- 13%. Is there anyone who can speak to this? Does it reflect something I might not be seeing about the firm?

Other primary concern is getting pigeonholed into IP in the event I don't LOVE it long-term and want to lateral elsewhere. I want to think that the experience will translate fine- drafting motions, trial work, depositions, etc., but it's hard to really gauge this as a law student. I want to stay in SoCal & they are still in the SoCal V10, which seems like further evidence exit opportunities will be fine, but again, I'm not really sure how much stock to put into that.

Dude, Irell basically only does patent lit. If you don’t want to get pigeonholed into IP you shouldn’t go there

Not quite the truth. When I interviewed there I was told that I should be ready to do patent work but that there was other work available. One partner only does copyright and another, only trademark. Sketchers is still a big client and they require all kinds of work and they recently won a commercial lit case for Uber. It's definitely patent heavy but it's not true to say that they *only* do patent lit. In addition, as the heavy lateralling from Irell demonstrates, Irell is pretty hirable (at least) in SoCal. I don't know if that will change after this "new direction" but I can't imagine you'll have a hard time lateralling out with that kind of experience.

[jackshunger]

Looking to get some insight into Irell as I'm strongly considering accepting an offer. Obviously, they are in many ways a patent lit boutique at this point, but it still seems like they do some other lit as well. I liked the people, culture, etc. a lot and am very interested in getting experience early on (esp trial exp), both of which it has over the other firm I'm considering (satellite office of a V10). Fit is important to me as I'd rather not work somewhere I want to jump ship ASAP. Aside from the refocusing/partner loss, which seems not to have affected their financials too much if last year's bonuses are any indication, are there any red flags?

This might be a silly concern, but I notice their female partnership stat is fairly bad- 13%. Is there anyone who can speak to this? Does it reflect something I might not be seeing about the firm?

Other primary concern is getting pigeonholed into IP in the event I don't LOVE it long-term and want to lateral elsewhere. I want to think that the experience will translate fine- drafting motions, trial work, depositions, etc., but it's hard to really gauge this as a law student. I want to stay in SoCal & they are still in the SoCal V10, which seems like further evidence exit opportunities will be fine, but again, I'm not really sure how much stock to put into that.

Dude, Irell basically only does patent lit. If you don’t want to get pigeonholed into IP you shouldn’t go there

Not quite the truth. When I interviewed there I was told that I should be ready to do patent work but that there was other work available. One partner only does copyright and another, only trademark. Sketchers is still a big client and they require all kinds of work and they recently won a commercial lit case for Uber. It's definitely patent heavy but it's not true to say that they *only* do patent lit. In addition, as the heavy lateralling from Irell demonstrates, Irell is pretty hirable (at least) in SoCal. I don't know if that will change after this "new direction" but I can't imagine you'll have a hard time lateralling out with that kind of experience.

Irell is odd. They are financially strong because Morgan Chu can single-handledly keep the firm flush with cash, and will always have a fantastic patent lit practice so long as he wants to practice. And if they want, they have the money to recruit lateral partners. But I get the sense it's hard for them to have a stable commercial lit practice because the patent lit practice is so strong and its politically powerful - it's the reason Heuston left. But if you have any interest in patent, it's an amazing place to be. Also, I'd imagine Andrei Iancu is coming back from the USPTO, so the patent practice should get even stronger.

[Anonymous User]

Looking to get some insight into Irell as I'm strongly considering accepting an offer. Obviously, they are in many ways a patent lit boutique at this point, but it still seems like they do some other lit as well. I liked the people, culture, etc. a lot and am very interested in getting experience early on (esp trial exp), both of which it has over the other firm I'm considering (satellite office of a V10). Fit is important to me as I'd rather not work somewhere I want to jump ship ASAP. Aside from the refocusing/partner loss, which seems not to have affected their financials too much if last year's bonuses are any indication, are there any red flags?

This might be a silly concern, but I notice their female partnership stat is fairly bad- 13%. Is there anyone who can speak to this? Does it reflect something I might not be seeing about the firm?

Other primary concern is getting pigeonholed into IP in the event I don't LOVE it long-term and want to lateral elsewhere. I want to think that the experience will translate fine- drafting motions, trial work, depositions, etc., but it's hard to really gauge this as a law student. I want to stay in SoCal & they are still in the SoCal V10, which seems like further evidence exit opportunities will be fine, but again, I'm not really sure how much stock to put into that.

Dude, Irell basically only does patent lit. If you don’t want to get pigeonholed into IP you shouldn’t go there

Not quite the truth. When I interviewed there I was told that I should be ready to do patent work but that there was other work available. One partner only does copyright and another, only trademark. Sketchers is still a big client and they require all kinds of work and they recently won a commercial lit case for Uber. It's definitely patent heavy but it's not true to say that they *only* do patent lit. In addition, as the heavy lateralling from Irell demonstrates, Irell is pretty hirable (at least) in SoCal. I don't know if that will change after this "new direction" but I can't imagine you'll have a hard time lateralling out with that kind of experience.

Irell is odd. They are financially strong because Morgan Chu can single-handledly keep the firm flush with cash, and will always have a fantastic patent lit practice so long as he wants to practice. And if they want, they have the money to recruit lateral partners. But I get the sense it's hard for them to have a stable commercial lit practice because the patent lit practice is so strong and its politically powerful - it's the reason Heuston left. But if you have any interest in patent, it's an amazing place to be. Also, I'd imagine Andrei Iancu is coming back from the USPTO, so the patent practice should get even stronger.

OP of comment you responded to. Definitely true re: Chu. On the other hand, there are some other rising stars there who are doing great work in both patents (Sheasby, Glasser, Tuan) and other areas (Harbour). Irell won't be the same without Chu but even if/when he leaves, a strong firm will remain. And it might even allow them to take another pivot back into a more diverse practice firm. Just for those worrying about financials--Irell is second in the country (behind Wachtell) on a per-lawyer revenue basis (revenue divided by amount of lawyers). Though their numbers declined by 12% from the year before.

[Anonymous User]

For what it is worth, I have heard they are trying pretty hard to beef up their general litigation practice. And it looks like they have hired some laterals recently, but I am sure you will do at least some IP work if you go there.

There is also this: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/12/irell-2020-bonuses/

[Anonymous User]

Interesting. I've heard the opposite from the partners that left Irell. I was told that a lot of Irell's recent departures (to the point where the firm is now half its size) is for the firm to refocus on doing IP law exclusively...

I would not go there in hope of doing anything other than patent lit.

Given that you already have an offer in hand, why not ask them direct, hard questions about non-IP work at the firm?

[TheBiggestLaw]

From talking with a few associates/partners/former Irell attorneys, it seems that the firm is focusing primarily on Patent/IP lit. However, the firm is still doing some general commercial lit. I left these conversations with a few impressions:

(1) IP lit is pretty broad itself, and the ability to do trademark, copyright, patents, etc. can give you a cool, diverse practice
(2) The firm still does some general litigation, and associates can take those cases if they'd like. It seems like they anticipate the firm to grow a little bit, but whether this practice grows I'm not entirely sure.
(3) IP cases (especially patent) often involve non-IP projects to work on. Patents are a temporary monopoly, and there are often some cool ancillary antitrust counterclaims and the like involved.
(4) Litigation is . . . litigation. Regardless of whether the subject matter involved is IP-related or not, you are still filing 12(b)(6)s, you are still doing damage awards, joining parties, etc. I think this was the biggest realization I had when talking with folks at the firm; so much of litigation involves the same stuff, but patent cases are almost always in federal court and go to trial far more often than other cases.

[glitched]

Do it. Patent lit is dope. If you can get pharma, even better.