Does engineering help if you DON'T want IP/patent? Forum

[juzam_djinn]

Let's say you're not particularly interested in IP/patent law, but you have a solid tech bg (ME/EE/CS). What I'd want to know is, does this help at all in the job search?

Any input from students who have been in this situation, or from recruiters, will be greatly appreciated!

[09042014]

Let's say you're not particularly interested in IP/patent law, but you have a solid tech bg (ME/EE/CS). What I'd want to know is, does this help at all in the job search?

Any input from students who have been in this situation, or from recruiters, will be greatly appreciated!

No. It might actually hurt. A guy in my class had a hard time finding a firm who would let him do non patent law even though he had a 4.0.

[r6_philly]

Let's say you're not particularly interested in IP/patent law, but you have a solid tech bg (ME/EE/CS). What I'd want to know is, does this help at all in the job search?

Any input from students who have been in this situation, or from recruiters, will be greatly appreciated!

No. It might actually hurt. A guy in my class had a hard time finding a firm who would let him do non patent law even though he had a 4.0.

What about corporate and transactional? Not that I want to, but it seems odd that they want you to stick to tech.

[rinkrat19]

How about an engineering degree that isn't very IP-desirable? (not EE/ME/CS)

I'm patent bar eligible by virtue of having passed the FE, but my major isn't one of the ones they're looking for. (Environmental)

[ben4847]

What's with all these engineers going to law school?
Does engineering really stink so much?

[rinkrat19]

What's with all these engineers going to law school?
Does engineering really stink so much?

We've decided to use our brains for evil, not good.

[ben4847]

What's with all these engineers going to law school?
Does engineering really stink so much?

We've decided to use our brains for evil, not good.

Yes, but how much were you able to make as an engineer, and how much is your expected income as a lawyer? (calculate your expected income by the average income of the school you are going to. So, if it is lower T14, then probably like 100k. Then, you really should adjust for risk aversion, so how much would you pay for a 60% chance of 160k, 20% chance of 60k, and 20% chance of zero.)

[r6_philly]

What's with all these engineers going to law school?
Does engineering really stink so much?

We've decided to use our brains for evil, not good.

That, and engineers need legal counsel.

[r6_philly]

Yes, but how much were you able to make as an engineer, and how much is your expected income as a lawyer? (calculate your expected income by the average income of the school you are going to. So, if it is lower T14, then probably like 100k. Then, you really should adjust for risk aversion, so how much would you pay for a 60% chance of 160k, 20% chance of 60k, and 20% chance of zero.)

That is not correct. We are talking about 60% of making 160k, 20% of making 120-140k, and 20% of making 80-100k (what we would make as engineers). Win win?

[ben4847]

Yes, but how much were you able to make as an engineer, and how much is your expected income as a lawyer? (calculate your expected income by the average income of the school you are going to. So, if it is lower T14, then probably like 100k. Then, you really should adjust for risk aversion, so how much would you pay for a 60% chance of 160k, 20% chance of 60k, and 20% chance of zero.)

That is not correct. We are talking about 60% of making 160k, 20% of making 120-140k, and 20% of making 80-100k (what we would make as engineers). Win win?

good point.
But still, you would calculate the added value of the law degree like I said.
So you'd make 80-100 as an engineer. You are adding a 60% 160 to that (there is no 20% 120-140). 160 is 60-80 more than 80-100. So your added value is 60% 60-80= 42.

[r6_philly]

good point.
But still, you would calculate the added value of the law degree like I said.
So you'd make 80-100 as an engineer. You are adding a 60% 160 to that (there is no 20% 120-140). 160 is 60-80 more than 80-100. So your added value is 60% 60-80= 42.

But that's only starting salary for law, but experience salary for engineer. So how much more can you make over 100 as an engineer? How much more as a lawyer. The upper limit is much higher for law. Lockstep for 5 years + bonus? Also some of us enjoy working with people/problems rather than just with the technical craft. So if you run a time series accounting for career/earning progression, then assign a value to the subjective value of how much more I like the practice of law, then it is a huge number, at least for me.

[ben4847]

good point.
But still, you would calculate the added value of the law degree like I said.
So you'd make 80-100 as an engineer. You are adding a 60% 160 to that (there is no 20% 120-140). 160 is 60-80 more than 80-100. So your added value is 60% 60-80= 42.

But that's only starting salary for law, but experience salary for engineer. So how much more can you make over 100 as an engineer? How much more as a lawyer. The upper limit is much higher for law. Lockstep for 5 years + bonus? Also some of us enjoy working with people/problems rather than just with the technical craft. So if you run a time series accounting for career/earning progression, then assign a value to the subjective value of how much more I like the practice of law, then it is a huge number, at least for me.

sounds good. good luck.

[LeftCoast]

good point.
But still, you would calculate the added value of the law degree like I said.
So you'd make 80-100 as an engineer. You are adding a 60% 160 to that (there is no 20% 120-140). 160 is 60-80 more than 80-100. So your added value is 60% 60-80= 42.

But that's only starting salary for law, but experience salary for engineer. So how much more can you make over 100 as an engineer? How much more as a lawyer. The upper limit is much higher for law. Lockstep for 5 years + bonus? Also some of us enjoy working with people/problems rather than just with the technical craft. So if you run a time series accounting for career/earning progression, then assign a value to the subjective value of how much more I like the practice of law, then it is a huge number, at least for me.

This is spot on

[expelliarmus]

I don't understand why it would hurt if you don't want to do patent/IP. Unless you don't have a good GPA from law undergrad, and cannot get into a good law school - in that case, it does hurt.
But then again, people have good and bad GPAs in all disciplines - it really depends more on the person than on the discipline.

[englawyer]

I speculate that it can hurt you for a few reasons:

1) The "engineering" stereotypes. Engineers tend to be nerdy, socially inept, etc. Since you pursued an engineering degree, there is a presumption that those stereotypes apply to you, which puts you at a disadvantage in the recruiting process. While these attributes are generally accepted in patent prosecution (known as the nerdy section of law firms) or even patent litigation groups, other practice groups have less tolerance for nerdy behavior.

2) Opportunity cost for the law firm. You have skills that are required to practice patent law, so it hurts firms indirectly to put you in non-patent groups. The firm will need to recruit another BS Engineering JD student, and there are not too many of us out there.

3) It would hurt firm "intellectual diversity" because they would have an engineer type in the corporate group AND in the patent group. Overall, the law firm would start to look like a firm filled with engineers.

[TLS_noobie]

Yes, but how much were you able to make as an engineer, and how much is your expected income as a lawyer? (calculate your expected income by the average income of the school you are going to. So, if it is lower T14, then probably like 100k. Then, you really should adjust for risk aversion, so how much would you pay for a 60% chance of 160k, 20% chance of 60k, and 20% chance of zero.)

That is not correct. We are talking about 60% of making 160k, 20% of making 120-140k, and 20% of making 80-100k (what we would make as engineers). Win win?

+1

TLS_Noobie likes this very much

[09042014]

Let's say you're not particularly interested in IP/patent law, but you have a solid tech bg (ME/EE/CS). What I'd want to know is, does this help at all in the job search?

Any input from students who have been in this situation, or from recruiters, will be greatly appreciated!

No. It might actually hurt. A guy in my class had a hard time finding a firm who would let him do non patent law even though he had a 4.0.

What about corporate and transactional? Not that I want to, but it seems odd that they want you to stick to tech.

Maybe it's easier, because the guy I know wanted to do lit. So sticking him in IP lit made more sense. And a lot of firms just don't do IP stuff, so I doubt it hurts.

I just wouldn't put the IP club, or take an IP class your first year. I got an interview with a firm who didn't have IP. And they weren't buying that I didn't want IP, but I had the IP journal on my resume.

[juzam_djinn]

Thanks for all the responses guys, especially englawyer and desert fox.

Anyone know any examples of lawyers in this situation? Those that "overcame" engineering stereotypes? Honestly, the only one I've found (quite randomly) is a prof in UVA that happens to teach crim law but was a civil engineer from MIT. I guess it didn't hurt that she went to HYS law...

I'm personally hoping that engineers going into law school overwhelmingly want IP/patent law, thus creating the impression that tech degree translates directly into tech law.

Lastly, I think people are only touching upon money as a reason for wanting to switch career paths, but I think some people legitimately would prefer being a lawyer to being an engineer. I've known this ever since I went to an engineering powerhouse undergrad and had no choice but to finish out a tech degree that I had little interest in. Doubt I'm the only one who feels this way.

[ben4847]

So then I'm wondering. Do you need to put your undergrad major on your resume? Why not just never even tell them you are an engineer?

[juzam_djinn]

I highly doubt it'd be easy to hide...and for me, the moment they see my undergrad school they will assume (correctly) that I was an engineer.

This thread was informative yet discouraging haha, I wanted to know if it would help and now I'm wondering how much it will hurt!

[rinkrat19]

How about an engineering degree that isn't very IP-desirable? (not EE/ME/CS)

I'm patent bar eligible by virtue of having passed the FE, but my major isn't one of the ones they're looking for. (Environmental)

Bumping my own question from earlier. Any input, DF?

I wouldn't be opposed to IP, but I figured I wouldn't be likely to get it, so I've been assuming a non-IP track.

[09042014]

How about an engineering degree that isn't very IP-desirable? (not EE/ME/CS)

I'm patent bar eligible by virtue of having passed the FE, but my major isn't one of the ones they're looking for. (Environmental)

Bumping my own question from earlier. Any input, DF?

I wouldn't be opposed to IP, but I figured I wouldn't be likely to get it, so I've been assuming a non-IP track.

I don't think you'll be harmed at all. I know a chem guy and a bio guy who did a lot better generally than they did for IP.

Thought if I were you, I'd go to the Loyola Patent Fair anyway. It's free interviews, and who knows, you might get something. But I'd save target firms for on campus. Also at NU, the IP boutiques are super easy to get interviews with. Put them spots 30+ on your bid list (where you aren't going to get any firm in a major city) and you'll get more interviews.

[TLS_noobie]

Maybe law is different than everything else but so far, from my experiences alone, it seems engineering never hurts as a background. As long as one can prove they are not a total anti-social incommunicable person then they are set because intelligence really never is questioned once the background is revealed. Obviously, being able to read/write/speak-up are necessary skills for most other non-engineering disciplines and so as long as those are taken care of, I don't see how engineering could really hurt. Engineers are typically heralded as being of high intellect. I understand there may be typecasting, but that, I'm sure, is easily overcome by what you elect to study and submit to interview for in law school. Perhaps I am totally wrong and maybe engineering is a bad thing (which I certainly hope is not the case), I have no experience in the legal community yet and so I can't speak on that. I do have experience in going from a heavy technical engineering role to a business/corporate role and what I just mentioned seems to be what I've seen.

My two cents.

[juzam_djinn]

Maybe law is different than everything else but so far, from my experiences alone, it seems engineering never hurts as a background. As long as one can prove they are not a total anti-social incommunicable person then they are set because intelligence really never is questioned once the background is revealed. Obviously, being able to read/write/speak-up are necessary skills for most other non-engineering disciplines and so as long as those are taken care of, I don't see how engineering could really hurt. Engineers are typically heralded as being of high intellect. I understand there may be typecasting, but that, I'm sure, is easily overcome by what you elect to study and submit to interview for in law school. Perhaps I am totally wrong and maybe engineering is a bad thing (which I certainly hope is not the case), I have no experience in the legal community yet and so I can't speak on that. I do have experience in going from a heavy technical engineering role to a business/corporate role and what I just mentioned seems to be what I've seen.

My two cents.

i like you

[rinkrat19]

How about an engineering degree that isn't very IP-desirable? (not EE/ME/CS)

I'm patent bar eligible by virtue of having passed the FE, but my major isn't one of the ones they're looking for. (Environmental)

Bumping my own question from earlier. Any input, DF?

I wouldn't be opposed to IP, but I figured I wouldn't be likely to get it, so I've been assuming a non-IP track.

I don't think you'll be harmed at all. I know a chem guy and a bio guy who did a lot better generally than they did for IP.

Thought if I were you, I'd go to the Loyola Patent Fair anyway. It's free interviews, and who knows, you might get something. But I'd save target firms for on campus. Also at NU, the IP boutiques are super easy to get interviews with. Put them spots 30+ on your bid list (where you aren't going to get any firm in a major city) and you'll get more interviews.

Sounds good. Thanks for the tip.