AUSA/USAO hiring Forum

[Anonymous User]

Tentative offer at MDFL

Willing to share any details about your background, the division, and the branch in MDFL?

Florida ties, T14, Biglaw, criminal division

How many years out? Crim trial experience at biglaw? Did you have ties within the office?

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone share thoughts on DNJ and how ex-AUSAs from that office generally are perceived in the New York biglaw market?

[Anonymous User]

Tentative offer at MDFL

Willing to share any details about your background, the division, and the branch in MDFL?

Florida ties, T14, Biglaw, criminal division

How many years out? Crim trial experience at biglaw? Did you have ties within the office?

junior, White collar experience/civil trial experience, no

[Anonymous User]

DC interview request

[Anonymous User]

Wondering if anyone has some perspective to share on the background check. I submitted my EQIP over 13-14 weeks ago and have heard nothing. (There isn’t anything disqualifying on there, AFAIK, and none of my references have been contacted.). I sent my HR contact (who has generally been extremely unresponsive) an email asking if we should do the drug testing while my docs are pending; no response. Should I just sit on my hands and wait? I’m supposed to start later in the summer, and am just getting nervous about time. I’d like to know that I still have a job before heading off to a new city, signing a lease, etc. Any advice would be much appreciated!

[Anonymous User]

Wondering if anyone has some perspective to share on the background check. I submitted my EQIP over 13-14 weeks ago and have heard nothing. (There isn’t anything disqualifying on there, AFAIK, and none of my references have been contacted.). I sent my HR contact (who has generally been extremely unresponsive) an email asking if we should do the drug testing while my docs are pending; no response. Should I just sit on my hands and wait? I’m supposed to start later in the summer, and am just getting nervous about time. I’d like to know that I still have a job before heading off to a new city, signing a lease, etc. Any advice would be much appreciated!

How much later are you supposed to start? And have you been interviewed? The overall check can take a full 3-4 months, although it's a little surprising no one's reached out to your references. Unfortunately the USAO has no real say over the timing of anything to do with the background check, because they don't carry it out - it's done by OARM in Main Justice, so to the extent you want to reach out to someone about it, try OARM (AskOARM@usdoj.gov - to be clear, I don't know if they'll give you any satisfaction at all, but they at least have access to information that the USAO doesn't). So while it would have been better if you'd gotten a response from HR, they probably didn't send one b/c they don't have any information for you, they don't have any control over the timeline, and they don't want to get it wrong (or waste their time, if it's a big office and they're busy. or lazy).

Also, I think it's a little bit of a faux pas to have brought up doing the drug testing, because the point of it is that it's random. They'll reach out to you and you get 48 hours to schedule it, IIRC, so you don't want to look like you're trying to time it in between drug binges or something. I'm sure no one will actually care that you asked, but it is better to wait that out. (HR will reach out to do the scheduling, but to my understanding, they're just acting on direction from OARM.)

(FWIW I can't give you good mileposts from my own background check b/c I got hired through the honors program, so they had 10-11 months to get mine done. But if it's at all helpful, I didn't get the confirmation of my entry on duty date - which was the only notification I got of passing the background check - until about 20 days before that day. They called me up a couple months before that to set an entry on duty date, because you can't get the results of the background check without an entry on duty date, but of course, you can't confirm your EOD date until you pass the background check, so it's not the most efficient or logical system.)

[Anonymous User]

I’m the anon with the long-pending background check.

First and foremost, thank you for the reply. I am supposed to start in August. No interview scheduled yet. As for the drug testing question, I appreciate your perspective and agree it could have been a faux pas (though, perhaps an equally fair inference is that I have nothing to hide and am eager to complete this process). For additional context, HR had noted earlier this year that another department would contact me soon to setup drug testing. Because that hasn’t happened, I wanted to bring it up, in case my file fell through the cracks.

Knowing your milestones is helpful, too, if for no other reason than it illustrates that the Department goes at its pace, as opposed to the pace of incoming hires. I appreciate your thoughtful, informative response!

[Anonymous User]

I’m the anon with the long-pending background check.

First and foremost, thank you for the reply. I am supposed to start in August. No interview scheduled yet. As for the drug testing question, I appreciate your perspective and agree it could have been a faux pas (though, perhaps an equally fair inference is that I have nothing to hide and am eager to complete this process). For additional context, HR had noted earlier this year that another department would contact me soon to setup drug testing. Because that hasn’t happened, I wanted to bring it up, in case my file fell through the cracks.

Knowing your milestones is helpful, too, if for no other reason than it illustrates that the Department goes at its pace, as opposed to the pace of incoming hires. I appreciate your thoughtful, informative response!

I was in the same boat as you and waited anxiously for so long, I was starting to think I had imagined the offer or that I would be denied clearance; just got my interim clearance. There was no interview for the interim clearance- I was told that an interview with the investigator is for the full security clearance which basically continues on while you start with interim clearance. I have friends who didn't hear about their final clearance results until a year into the job. It took almost 12 weeks from eQIP submission to being told I had cleared interim clearance and getting the final offer letter with an actual start date. Prior to that I had just a tentative offer letter with no start date given at all. The start date that you were given is probably HR's target date based on a class starting or something. My start date is also end of August; HR knew I would need to move so gave me some time. A few weeks after eQIP submission I got a random call from a DC number to schedule my drug testing within 48 hours of the call. I wouldn't worry too much that you haven't gotten that call yet (I know it's easier said than done), they may have been backlogged with getting summer interns or honors people drug tested. I had a very responsive HR person, and the one or two times I checked in with her re clearance, it was the same non-answer that it is OARM that handles the clearance process and that I would just have to wait and that the USAO was in the same boat of waiting on clearances for everyone they'd hired. FWIW I have read elsewhere that perhaps the long wait was just due to the timing, with OARM being responsible for intern clearances as well...Good luck, hope you hear back soon!

[Anonymous User]

^ this is a really helpful post - I’m the person who went in through honors, and that makes sense about the interview; I think they completed my full background check before I started because they had so much time and didn’t need to bother with an interim clearance, so I always wondered how that played out.

But honestly, with the feds, chances are good that “it’s just slow” is a safe default assumption.

[Anonymous User]

First-round interview invite for N.D.Ga.

[Anonymous User]

Can someone share what the timeline looks like after getting a verbal offer?

I received a call from the US Attorney giving me an offer. I accepted. This was 2 weeks ago. I have heard nothing except an email from the Executive AUSA that an offer letter is coming.

After I get this offer letter, is that when the national security backgorund check process will begin? And then do I get another letter after that? How long does that take and any steps in between?

[Anonymous User]

Is anyone waiting post a second round interview at EDNY?

First round was surprisingly intense and was with line AUSAs. So I was grateful I got the second round with supervisors but it had substantive questions though the supervisors weren't as intense as the line AUSAs

[Anonymous User]

Can someone share what the timeline looks like after getting a verbal offer?

I received a call from the US Attorney giving me an offer. I accepted. This was 2 weeks ago. I have heard nothing except an email from the Executive AUSA that an offer letter is coming.

After I get this offer letter, is that when the national security backgorund check process will begin? And then do I get another letter after that? How long does that take and any steps in between?

I think it varies by office, but I have been having a similar experience. Took 3(?) weeks after a verbal offer to get outreach from HR with instructions for e-QIP. I haven't even gotten an offer letter yet. My HR point of contact said 6-8 weeks on average for the preliminary clearance once your forms are submitted.

[Anonymous User]

Final round invite with DC

[Anonymous User]

Can someone share what the timeline looks like after getting a verbal offer?

I received a call from the US Attorney giving me an offer. I accepted. This was 2 weeks ago. I have heard nothing except an email from the Executive AUSA that an offer letter is coming.

After I get this offer letter, is that when the national security backgorund check process will begin? And then do I get another letter after that? How long does that take and any steps in between?

I think it varies by office, but I have been having a similar experience. Took 3(?) weeks after a verbal offer to get outreach from HR with instructions for e-QIP. I haven't even gotten an offer letter yet. My HR point of contact said 6-8 weeks on average for the preliminary clearance once your forms are submitted.

Got it, sounds like the next step to occur is that someone from HR will reach out with the background check documents. Do you know what your salary is going to be yet? I accepted verbally but I do have a number salary-wise that I can't go below due to family reasons.

[Anonymous User]

Do you know what your salary is going to be yet? I accepted verbally but I do have a number salary-wise that I can't go below due to family reasons.

Have you looked at the AD-payscale and the locality pay? You are likely to be paid at around the 25th-36th percentile of your AD pay grade, with locality pay added to that. (Most offices I am familiar with start people at the 25th percentile, but it might be higher if the office is in a particularly high COL area; I know of one that pays at the 36th percentile, but I can’t guarantee there are no other options). If there’s a salary you can’t go below, you should compare it to those numbers and if they don’t match up you should raise it now. You should probably have been told the salary with your offer because negotiation isn’t generally a thing, and if the money isn’t going to work for you, then they will want to know now rather than after the time/effort of a background check (they will want to be able to move on to the next candidate and get them on board quickly, rather than have to spend time on 2 background checks).

(I think sometimes hiring people honestly forget to say the salary because generally it is what it is, they don’t have to work out an appropriate offer, so it’s not really part of their process.)

[Anonymous User]

Do you know what your salary is going to be yet? I accepted verbally but I do have a number salary-wise that I can't go below due to family reasons.

Have you looked at the AD-payscale and the locality pay? You are likely to be paid at around the 25th-36th percentile of your AD pay grade, with locality pay added to that. (Most offices I am familiar with start people at the 25th percentile, but it might be higher if the office is in a particularly high COL area; I know of one that pays at the 36th percentile, but I can’t guarantee there are no other options). If there’s a salary you can’t go below, you should compare it to those numbers and if they don’t match up you should raise it now. You should probably have been told the salary with your offer because negotiation isn’t generally a thing, and if the money isn’t going to work for you, then they will want to know now rather than after the time/effort of a background check (they will want to be able to move on to the next candidate and get them on board quickly, rather than have to spend time on 2 background checks).

(I think sometimes hiring people honestly forget to say the salary because generally it is what it is, they don’t have to work out an appropriate offer, so it’s not really part of their process.)

Thanks for this. Your data points, even if anecdotal, were very helpful.

My locality % is 25%+ if that says anything about COL.

In my district, the office is trying to standardize the pay of all line AUSAs so that everyone who is in the same class year gets paid the same.

What do you think that says about where in the salary range I can expect to end up?

[Anonymous User]

Do you know what your salary is going to be yet? I accepted verbally but I do have a number salary-wise that I can't go below due to family reasons.

Have you looked at the AD-payscale and the locality pay? You are likely to be paid at around the 25th-36th percentile of your AD pay grade, with locality pay added to that. (Most offices I am familiar with start people at the 25th percentile, but it might be higher if the office is in a particularly high COL area; I know of one that pays at the 36th percentile, but I can’t guarantee there are no other options). If there’s a salary you can’t go below, you should compare it to those numbers and if they don’t match up you should raise it now. You should probably have been told the salary with your offer because negotiation isn’t generally a thing, and if the money isn’t going to work for you, then they will want to know now rather than after the time/effort of a background check (they will want to be able to move on to the next candidate and get them on board quickly, rather than have to spend time on 2 background checks).

(I think sometimes hiring people honestly forget to say the salary because generally it is what it is, they don’t have to work out an appropriate offer, so it’s not really part of their process.)

Thanks for this. Your data points, even if anecdotal, were very helpful.

My locality % is 25%+ if that says anything about COL.

In my district, the office is trying to standardize the pay of all line AUSAs so that everyone who is in the same class year gets paid the same.

What do you think that says about where in the salary range I can expect to end up?

It doesn’t really change anything about what I’ve already said. My locality pay is higher than 25% and my office starts everyone at the 25th percentile. And yes, IME the intent is to pay everyone from the same class year the same, which is why there’s a percentile (IME) 25th-36th that everyone starts at. There isn’t normally a huge range in what anyone in a given class year makes (at least until you hit the top grade) because most years your raise is automatic from going up a grade, not because your percentile changes (so if everyone in a class year starts at the 25th percentile, each year their raise arises from an automatic grade increase but not a percentile change, if that makes sense, so no disparities. I think this can change a little once you max out in grade, bc at that point salary increases are entirely discretionary, so merit may make some difference, but even then a given office may adhere to a completely automatic raise by class year policy).

All that said, there can be some office variation so it is possible that your office handles some of this differently; I’m just going off what I know. But based on what I know, unless they specifically told you that they *can’t* tell you the salary until later in the process (which I would find surprising, but if that’s the case it sounds like we’re in a different pay universe anyway), I would raise this with them right away. It sounds like there’s an at least somewhat realistic possibility you will have to withdraw based on salary, and I really doubt that’s even on their radar at this point. (Unless 25th percentile of your grade meets your requirements, in which case I think you can assume you’re good.)

[Anonymous User]

Ok, got it, thanks. 25 percentile mark is fine for my purposes so seems like i can assume it will be fine.

[Anonymous User]

Ok, got it, thanks. 25 percentile mark is fine for my purposes so seems like i can assume it will be fine.

This is the other anon you asked about salary/timing. Not to give you false hope, but my office (major metro area, not NYC) is starting me closer to the 50th percentile for my band. Your HR contact should also be able to tell you your salary once it's been confirmed. Also, just got my preliminary clearance, and the time from my e-QIP submission (when HR submitted it, not when I sent it to them) was 5-6 weeks.

I'm going to miss the stupidly large biglaw paychecks. Had to get out before the golden handcuffs got too tight.

[Anonymous User]

Ok, got it, thanks. 25 percentile mark is fine for my purposes so seems like i can assume it will be fine.

The anon you were replying to here: that's excellent then, and the other anon definitely provides a valuable and more comparable data point (I don't have as much experience with really major metro payscales). Just when you mentioned that you had a number you couldn't go below, I got a little worried that you might run into an issue down the road (not knowing your family circumstances or location or anything). I still think they should have told you your salary already and you'd be on solid ground asking for that info, but it doesn't sound like it will derail anything, which was mostly my concern (without intending to freak you out!).

[Anonymous User]

Thank you both anons! I've been told that the offer letter is ready to go but that the office is just waiting for approval for budgeting from the executive office budget department.

[Anonymous User]

Any insight into the (civil) defensive components of large-ish municipal USAOs? What type of lawyers usually work there, what are exits like, what do the ausas spend the majority of their hours on, what might they be looking for in a candidate, etc.?

[Anonymous User]

Any insight into the (civil) defensive components of large-ish municipal USAOs? What type of lawyers usually work there, what are exits like, what do the ausas spend the majority of their hours on, what might they be looking for in a candidate, etc.?

With the caveat that I'm in a smaller district (though I interned in a bigger one and have met people from around the country), at least in my experience, civil defense is going to be primarily FTCA (tort claims), employment discrimination, medmal, prisoner litigation, defense of agency decisions (ATF licensing, SSA, that kind of thing), various civil rights stuff like excessive force. As on the criminal side, you will be running your cases pretty much from the start, so they will want someone who is comfortable doing so. I can't give a specific number of years' experience preferred, though anecdotally, people I've met from around the country usually seem to have had at least 5-7ish years experience, if not more.

Depending on the office, people seem to come from biglaw, midlaw (in the sense of good local firms), personal injury, and state government. I think there are actually quite a few people from midlaw, who might get more hands-on experience than in biglaw, but again, it will vary by office since it depends so much on USA preferences.

School background actually varies quite a bit - again, this is anecdotal based on my stalking, but there seem to be slightly fewer T14 types than on the criminal side of the house. I think there's also little more focus than in criminal on hiring people with demonstrated experience, so candidates tend to be slightly more senior (on the criminal side, if you want someone with a fancy biglaw pedigree rather than (say) a local prosecutor, you know you're going to have to train them up in criminal stuff; on the civil side, you should be able to hire someone who already has directly relevant experience, although generally DOJ is very good about training as well). But none of this is set in stone. I suspect a lot will depend on how well you can sell your desire to work for the government, given that you could probably just keep doing civil defensive work in the private sector and probably for more money.

I haven't actually worked in a firm post-graduation so it's a little hard to compare, but you spend your time on whatever your cases need at that given time. Again, since you're running your own cases, you do all the stuff (MTD, answer, discovery, hiring experts, depos, MSJ, negotiation, settlement, trial, etc.). You do work collectively also so may be partnered with someone (in which case the two of you would work out who does what, with one of you as lead - how much you do can depend on the case and your co-counsel). If there's a really large/complex suit or something, then you will probably see something more like a private firm where there's a hierarchy and a more senior person will dole out tasks to a team (in my current district, this happened when covid hit and the ACLU brought a class action suit on behalf of immigration detainees to try to get them out of custody, but is relatively uncommon otherwise. This may be more common in other districts, but I don't know).

I suppose maybe the biggest difference from the private context is that suits arise from something related to a specific agency (like medmal from treatment at a VA hospital) so you work with agency counsel, who are responsible for a lot of getting discovery/connecting you to witnesses/general assistance in things like drafting pleadings. Obviously that experience can vary by agency counsel bandwidth and (to be blunt) competence, and occasionally what the agency thinks is in their best interests and what you need to do legally can conflict. I have had great experiences and less great experiences, though overall more good than bad.

The other big difference is probably getting approval for everything (like the process for hiring an expert is long and slow, getting authorization to settle for over a certain amount is long and slow and hard, you have to get authorization to make certain defenses, that kind of thing). A lot of approvals have to come from main justice and people there are VERY bureaucratic and hierarchical (they will push back if they think your expert is too expensive, for instance). I don't generally have to worry about costs/resources in the way that someone at a smaller firm might, but I still have to justify spending the taxpayer dough.

Also, there is an inevitable amount of completely frivolous pro se litigation that isn't remotely legally difficult, but still takes time and is a PITA. I have a colleague who's dealing with someone who's been suing about the same issues since the late 1990s - they just keep changing districts as they keep moving around the country - and who will do things like file an objection to a M2dismiss (fine), a motion to "clarify facts," a motion to "make the government tell the truth," a motion to w/d the last 2 motions, an amended objection, etc. etc, in like a 2-week period. These suits never have any chance of raising anything remotely meritorious but you do have to go through the process of getting rid of them, and different judges are more/less efficient at dispensing with them, depending on workload and temperament.

As for exits - honestly I see a lot of lifers; it feels like a lot of people come over to the USAO after getting tired of private practice/the billable hour and settle in for the hours and benefits. And I think there tend to be more locals among civil AUSAs than criminal ones, which contributes to a high rate of lifers. But again that's shaded by the districts I know best. Some people will go on to Main Justice (though again anecdotally, a lot of the defensive civil people in Main Justice did not go through a USAO but came from biglaw, and seem to have slightly fancier pedigrees). I think you'd always be pretty marketable for medmal and employment discrimination practices, as those seem (to me) the most directly transferable (that is, defending the government on these actions doesn't seem that different from defending any other medical provider/employer. FTCA seems to have more government-specific kinds of considerations and private personal injury practices are different, though I'm spitballing). I don't see a lot of civil AUSAs go on to judgeships, compared to the criminal side, but again, it's doubtless possible.

[Anonymous User]

Same anon. Very helpful thank you.