Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA? Forum

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:35 pm

I interviewed with a d. ct. judge in a district with a heavy patent docket and a COA judge in flyover country (think 6th, 8th, 10th or 11th Circuits). I was lucky enough to receive offers from both. My plan is to do IP litigation at a biglaw firm after my clerkship. Is the prestige bump from doing a COA clerkship enough to outweigh the substantive usefulness of clerking for a district judge who has a lot of patent cases? The district judge said I would spend about 3/4 of my time working on patent cases. Obviously, I wouldn't spend any time working on patent cases with the COA judge, although I may work on other IP cases (Lanham Act or copyright) if any happen to be on the docket (although this appears to be rare). How would my biglaw firm view the d. ct. clerkship as opposed to the COA clerkship?

seizmaar · Post by **seizmaar** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:38 pm

go to E.D. Texas bro

Elston Gunn · Post by **Elston Gunn** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:57 pm

I'm pretty sure the answer here is whichever one you'd rather do.

Shaggier1 · Post by **Shaggier1** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:02 pm

go to E.D. Texas bro

+1

Dr. Review · Post by **Dr. Review** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:08 pm

seizmaar wrote:go to E.D. Texas bro

+1

Desert Fox · Post by **Desert Fox** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:10 pm

1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover

bk1 · Post by **bk1** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:18 pm

I'd lean patent docket here unless you were thinking of exiting patent litigation in the future.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:22 pm

Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover

(Judge Bacharach)

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover
(Judge Bacharach)

I don't understand the implication here.

seizmaar · Post by **seizmaar** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:17 pm

oklahoma city sucks?

Jchance · Post by **Jchance** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 7:43 pm

OP, would you mind PM me who the d. ct. judge is?

jbagelboy · Post by **jbagelboy** » Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:50 pm

the relevant trial docket unless you want to be a law professor, in which case appellate experience even in some remote circuit seems to be preferable.

qwerfdsa · Post by **qwerfdsa** » Fri Nov 21, 2014 7:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:1) Definitely ED Texas

2) No COA is flyover
(Judge Bacharach)

Was there something in particular regarding Judge Bacharach, or was that just an example of a fly over state?

hiima3L · Post by **hiima3L** » Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:40 pm

D. ct. and it's not even close.

If you want to litigate, trial court experience is vastly better than appellate court experience.

fats provolone · Post by **fats provolone** » Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:24 pm

enjoy texarkana

Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA? Forum

Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Register for access!

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Re: Substantively relevant d. ct. or flyover COA?

Register now!