Top Law Schools

If one is not willing to get a PhD to become a competent patent prosecutor in the chemical sciences, would one be better suited to try to become a patent litigator or general practice attorney by default? The one in question has a BS in Chemical Engineering.

Kafkaesquire wrote:If one is not willing to get a PhD to become a competent patent prosecutor in the chemical sciences, would one be better suited to try to become a patent litigator or general practice attorney by default? The one in question has a BS in Chemical Engineering.

Given your background, you would be at somewhat of a disadvantage if you tried going into patent prosecution since many firms look to hire just PhDs in the bio/chem field and many others would prefer a PhD, so you would have to finish near the top of your class and have some good WE/externships to be real competitive (years ago a BS would be enough, but lots of PhDs are now entering the field). Patent litigation is a better bet since a PhD is nice but not necessary at all; however, you will have to do very well in law school since these jobs are scarce and highly desirable. One way to make yourself more competitive in the general IP field would be to pass the patent bar exam prior to or early on in law school. If possible, prior to law school since you'll be very busy during school. Many people can pass the exam with just 3-4 months of studying. Just be sure to study material including the recent AIA. I hope this helps.

mx23250 wrote:

Kafkaesquire wrote:If one is not willing to get a PhD to become a competent patent prosecutor in the chemical sciences, would one be better suited to try to become a patent litigator or general practice attorney by default? The one in question has a BS in Chemical Engineering.

Given your background, you would be at somewhat of a disadvantage if you tried going into patent prosecution since many firms look to hire just PhDs in the bio/chem field and many others would prefer a PhD, so you would have to finish near the top of your class and have some good WE/externships to be real competitive (years ago a BS would be enough, but lots of PhDs are now entering the field). Patent litigation is a better bet since a PhD is nice but not necessary at all; however, you will have to do very well in law school since these jobs are scarce and highly desirable. One way to make yourself more competitive in the general IP field would be to pass the patent bar exam prior to or early on in law school. If possible, prior to law school since you'll be very busy during school. Many people can pass the exam with just 3-4 months of studying. Just be sure to study material including the recent AIA. I hope this helps.

It does help. I sort of think along the same lines as you.

If I don't want to work in a big law firm and/or want better chances of earning a decent salary, do you think I could settle for a mid-market general-practice litigation, using my background to stand out considerably?

I plan on having 3-5 years of engineering experience before attending law school, during which time I would have already studied for and taken the LSAT and patent bar. But, big-law patent litigation is still going to be competitive, so if I (1) strike out there, (2) don't get offered an in-house position, or (3) don't want insane stress, would mid-market gen-practice litigation be my next best bet? In comparison to the big-law lawyers, the lawyers I know who work in mid-market gen-practice litigation seem to have a nice balance of income, free time, family life, work ethic, and respect from/connection to the community.

Sign up for the loyola patent fair and go balls out for patent lit there. At OCI, you may want to try to hedge your bets a little bit.

Kafkaesquire wrote:

mx23250 wrote:

Kafkaesquire wrote:If one is not willing to get a PhD to become a competent patent prosecutor in the chemical sciences, would one be better suited to try to become a patent litigator or general practice attorney by default? The one in question has a BS in Chemical Engineering.

Given your background, you would be at somewhat of a disadvantage if you tried going into patent prosecution since many firms look to hire just PhDs in the bio/chem field and many others would prefer a PhD, so you would have to finish near the top of your class and have some good WE/externships to be real competitive (years ago a BS would be enough, but lots of PhDs are now entering the field). Patent litigation is a better bet since a PhD is nice but not necessary at all; however, you will have to do very well in law school since these jobs are scarce and highly desirable. One way to make yourself more competitive in the general IP field would be to pass the patent bar exam prior to or early on in law school. If possible, prior to law school since you'll be very busy during school. Many people can pass the exam with just 3-4 months of studying. Just be sure to study material including the recent AIA. I hope this helps.

It does help. I sort of think along the same lines as you.

If I don't want to work in a big law firm and/or want better chances of earning a decent salary, do you think I could settle for a mid-market general-practice litigation, using my background to stand out considerably?

I plan on having 3-5 years of engineering experience before attending law school, during which time I would have already studied for and taken the LSAT and patent bar. But, big-law patent litigation is still going to be competitive, so if I (1) strike out there, (2) don't get offered an in-house position, or (3) don't want insane stress, would mid-market gen-practice litigation be my next best bet? In comparison to the big-law lawyers, the lawyers I know who work in mid-market gen-practice litigation seem to have a nice balance of income, free time, family life, work ethic, and respect from/connection to the community.

I think you would have a very unique background for general litigation, whether it would help you substantially, I'm not sure? I would think you could market your background as providing you with a unique set of analytical skills.

Desert Fox wrote:Sign up for the loyola patent fair and go balls out for patent lit there. At OCI, you may want to try to hedge your bets a little bit.

this. also, don't go to law school.

Kafkaesquire wrote: If I don't want to work in a big law firm and/or want better chances of earning a decent salary, do you think I could settle for a mid-market general-practice litigation, using my background to stand out considerably?

science background will NOT help you to "stand out" in general-practice lit., so dont count on it.

with your degree, if you are at harvard, or top 50% at t14 or top 33% at t20, you are set for any IP career you want, either lit. or pros (although there is more opportunity in lit.). Thats why they are called "IPSecure".

patogordo wrote: this. also, don't go to law school.

+1

Jchance wrote:

Kafkaesquire wrote: If I don't want to work in a big law firm and/or want better chances of earning a decent salary, do you think I could settle for a mid-market general-practice litigation, using my background to stand out considerably?

science background will NOT help you to "stand out" in general-practice lit., so dont count on it.

with your degree, if you are at harvard, or top 50% at t14 or top 33% at t20, you are set for any IP career you want, either lit. or pros (although there is more opportunity in lit.). Thats why they are called "IPSecure".

patogordo wrote: this. also, don't go to law school.

+1

I'm not convinced of your generalizations.

feel free to spend 3 years figuring it out for yourself, then.

patogordo wrote:feel free to spend 3 years figuring it out for yourself, then.

"With your degree, if you are...top 33% at t20, you are set for any IP career you want, either lit. or pros (although there is more opportunity in lit.)."

How much of this is well-documented statistics and how much of this is speculation? If any of it is speculation, then the speculation should be separated from the well-documented statistics. The poster was being lazy, at best, and misleading or lying, at worst, with his statements--either way, due to how they were presented, it is only proper to give little weight to them.

And, I would think that a bunch of aspiring lawyers would be able to understand and appreciate my approach without getting their panties in a bunch.

Kafkaesquire wrote:

patogordo wrote:feel free to spend 3 years figuring it out for yourself, then.

"With your degree, if you are...top 33% at t20, you are set for any IP career you want, either lit. or pros (although there is more opportunity in lit.)."

How much of this is well-documented statistics and how much of this is speculation? If any of it is speculation, then the speculation should be separated from the well-documented statistics. The poster was being lazy, at best, and misleading or lying, at worst, with his statements--either way, due to how they were presented, it is only proper to give little weight to them.

And, I would think that a bunch of aspiring lawyers would be able to understand and appreciate my approach without getting their panties in a bunch.

HAHA, you want well-documented statistics in the field where law schools post fake employment stats, where there is no transparency about what grades are needed to get employed in what jobs, etc. There's things called LawSchoolTransparency and TLS's wisdom (aka current law students' experiences after applying for jobs in the current market). I belong to the latter and I'm in the IP field, so if you think I talked out of my ass, have fun discovering that out for yourself.

Edit: I'm only responding to you because I had people helped me get to where I am today, so I'm giving back to clueless 0Ls. Make one bad choice and your life is effed.

Jchance wrote:

Kafkaesquire wrote:

patogordo wrote:feel free to spend 3 years figuring it out for yourself, then.

"With your degree, if you are...top 33% at t20, you are set for any IP career you want, either lit. or pros (although there is more opportunity in lit.)."

How much of this is well-documented statistics and how much of this is speculation? If any of it is speculation, then the speculation should be separated from the well-documented statistics. The poster was being lazy, at best, and misleading or lying, at worst, with his statements--either way, due to how they were presented, it is only proper to give little weight to them.

And, I would think that a bunch of aspiring lawyers would be able to understand and appreciate my approach without getting their panties in a bunch.

HAHA, you want well-documented statistics in the field where law schools post fake employment stats, where there is no transparency about what grades are needed to get employed in what jobs, etc. There's things called LawSchoolTransparency and TLS's wisdom (aka current law students' experiences after applying for jobs in the current market). I belong to the latter and I'm in the IP field, so if you think I talked out of my ass, have fun discovering that out for yourself.

Edit: I'm only responding to you because I had people helped me get to where I am today, so I'm giving back to clueless 0Ls. Make one bad choice and your life is effed.

Yeah, I do want them. A lot of people do. Is that funny? Is it also funny that I took the above statistics with several grains of salt based on the fact that you were stating them speculatively?

Jchance wrote:
HAHA, you want well-documented statistics in the field where law schools post fake employment stats, where there is no transparency about what grades are needed to get employed in what jobs, etc. There's things called LawSchoolTransparency and TLS's wisdom (aka current law students' experiences after applying for jobs in the current market). I belong to the latter and I'm in the IP field, so if you think I talked out of my ass, have fun discovering that out for yourself.

Edit: I'm only responding to you because I had people helped me get to where I am today, so I'm giving back to clueless 0Ls. Make one bad choice and your life is effed.

Since you've been on the "front lines" recently, what's your take on the current state of "IPSECURE"? I don't hear as much about it on TLS compared to a few years ago, but I don't know if it's because they've been just as screwed in the job hunt as everyone else, or if it's because patent-eligible folks have decided to do something else besides law and aren't around.

ScottRiqui wrote:

Jchance wrote:
HAHA, you want well-documented statistics in the field where law schools post fake employment stats, where there is no transparency about what grades are needed to get employed in what jobs, etc. There's things called LawSchoolTransparency and TLS's wisdom (aka current law students' experiences after applying for jobs in the current market). I belong to the latter and I'm in the IP field, so if you think I talked out of my ass, have fun discovering that out for yourself.

Edit: I'm only responding to you because I had people helped me get to where I am today, so I'm giving back to clueless 0Ls. Make one bad choice and your life is effed.

Since you've been on the "front lines" recently, what's your take on the current state of "IPSECURE"? I don't hear as much about it on TLS compared to a few years ago, but I don't know if it's because they've been just as screwed in the job hunt as everyone else, or if it's because patent-eligible folks have decided to do something else besides law and aren't around.

From what I've seen, assuming IP people are applying broadly and where they should be applying, i.e. where IP is booming for their specific field (EE/CS to SV/SF, Bio/Chem to San Diego, Minn, Indiana, etc.):
-EE/CS are still desirable, as there is a lack of supply and high in demand, top 25% or so from T2 can still get jobs (not swimming in offers tho), top 50% at t20 are doing ok too, and I'm extrapolating to top 33% at T1.
-Bio/Chem folks are having it tougher, low demand and decent supply, thus top 33% at t20 can still get jobs (with LR or patent bar in your pocket) - think Fish (cb), Finnegan (screener), and above-market pay boutique (offer).
Still holds true that 3L OCI get job offers and even grads passing the bar getting offers from IP firms or BigLaw for full-time employment. IP hiring occurs all the time.

Maybe someone else can chime in and give more opinions, this is only one person's view to say its the trend.

Jchance wrote:

ScottRiqui wrote:

Jchance wrote:
HAHA, you want well-documented statistics in the field where law schools post fake employment stats, where there is no transparency about what grades are needed to get employed in what jobs, etc. There's things called LawSchoolTransparency and TLS's wisdom (aka current law students' experiences after applying for jobs in the current market). I belong to the latter and I'm in the IP field, so if you think I talked out of my ass, have fun discovering that out for yourself.

Edit: I'm only responding to you because I had people helped me get to where I am today, so I'm giving back to clueless 0Ls. Make one bad choice and your life is effed.

Since you've been on the "front lines" recently, what's your take on the current state of "IPSECURE"? I don't hear as much about it on TLS compared to a few years ago, but I don't know if it's because they've been just as screwed in the job hunt as everyone else, or if it's because patent-eligible folks have decided to do something else besides law and aren't around.

From what I've seen, assuming IP people are applying broadly and where they should be applying, i.e. where IP is booming for their specific field (EE/CS to SV/SF, Bio/Chem to San Diego, Minn, Indiana, etc.):
-EE/CS are still desirable, as there is a lack of supply and high in demand, top 25% or so from T2 can still get jobs (not swimming in offers tho), top 50% at t20 are doing ok too, and I'm extrapolating to top 33% at T1.
-Bio/Chem folks are having it tougher, low demand and decent supply, thus top 33% at t20 can still get jobs (with LR or patent bar in your pocket) - think Fish (cb), Finnegan (screener), and above-market pay boutique (offer).
Still holds true that 3L OCI get job offers and even grads passing the bar getting offers from IP firms or BigLaw for full-time employment. IP hiring occurs all the time.

Maybe someone else can chime in and give more opinions, this is only one person's view to say its the trend.

CS/~20% at T1. I got a lot of interviews in SF/SV. Everyone I worked with who did Bio/Chem was a Phd. There were a few lawyers who had a BS in either Bio or Chem but they had already been there for a long time.

Horrible grammar - See below.

DildaMan wrote: CS/~20% at T1. I got a lot of interviews in SF/SV. Everyone I worked with who did Bio/Chem was a Phd. There were a few lawyers who has BS in Bio/Chem but they were already there for a long time.

This sounds about right for those with a chem/chem-eng degree. Thankfully I can make decent money as a chem e while waiting for the legal job market to potentially recuperate.

ChemE is in strong demand for lit departments because of all the ANDA litigation going on right now. By "strong demand" I mean relative to i.e. general lit. You'll still need strong grades from a strong school.

Prosecution for ChemE's is pretty scarce but it exists. WE helps. You won't be prosecuting biotech, you'll be prosecuting i.e. polymer processes and other industrial chemical processes.

My impression has been that there are a lot of ip prosecution/counseling boutiques that almost nobody has heard of outside ip that you can fall back on for a decent salary if you don't kill it in LS.

Overall ip has more opportunities than non-ip, but LS overall is still a scary bet at sticker price.

...

elcali wrote:Hi Folks please pitch in and give some advice:

Patent agent (admitted to GW at sticker, waiting Emory hopefully with some $)
Aim to practice in DC or California

electrical engineering masters from UCLA, originally chemical engineering bachelors

Career advice? Should I try to find something (include volunteering) this summer to boost resume? Can I register for PLLI?

Really worrying about law school cost and how market is going to be in 3 years...
Thanks

What's your LSAT? Did you study using some of the guides on TLS? I wouldn't pay sticker thats for sure. The opportunity cost and missed wages if you go full time will take a while to break even. (Not sure what a patent agent salary is) GW, GULC, and USD (San Diego) have part time programs (not sure of prospects for patent grads of USD though).

With a MSEE degree from a top20 program you will get tons of offers if you are above median at GW. 0L here, but have gotten great advice from current students at GW.

You should make your own thread with gpa and lsat score to get advice on where to apply given your goals and to maximize scholarship chances.

elcali wrote:Hi Folks please pitch in and give some advice:

Patent agent (admitted to GW at sticker, waiting Emory hopefully with some $)
Aim to practice in DC or California

electrical engineering masters from UCLA, originally chemical engineering bachelors

Career advice? Should I try to find something (include volunteering) this summer to boost resume? Can I register for PLLI?

Really worrying about law school cost and how market is going to be in 3 years...
Thanks

Are you saying that you are already a patent agent? If so, you already know the market, so I'm not sure what your question is. If not, you can earn 100k+ as a patent agent without a JD. With your EE degree, you will have a good shot to land a decent salary if you've passed the patent bar and are otherwise competent. If your goal is simply to optimize money without killing yourself in terms of hours, you might as well just kick it as a patent agent. If you'd like to be a patent attorney (status, higher salary, options for more varied work), then do law school. I'd lock in a few years of patent agent experience before starting school tho. Better to know the market well and give your resume a solid boost before you roll the dice on law school.