UC Irvine c/o 2016 Applicants (2012-2013) Forum

[teiswei]

Do we get reimbursed for hotel/flight/miles?

Here is what they told me:

Eligible Reimbursements
Only admitted students that are visiting campus from outside of a 50 mile radius either for ASW or at another time may be reimbursed for a total of not more than $400 for out-of-state and $150 for in-state travel related expenses. With proper documentation and receipts, reimbursable expenses may include:

1. Airfare travel with a total cost receipt that includes your name, airline ticket number, and travel dates that coincide with your visit.

2. Hotel lodging that includes the cost of the room, associated taxes and hotel parking, if applicable. A hotel-generated folio/receipt showing a balance of zero will be required. All incidental expenses (including internet charges) are not reimbursable.

3. Mileage is reimbursable at approximately $.55 a mile. Mileage reimbursements will only be made based on a mileage calculation submitted that includes the route taken as documented by Google maps http://maps.google.com/.

4. Ground transportation including airport shuttle or taxi. Original receipts will be required.

All receipts for travel related reimbursement requests must be submitted within 10 calendar days of the date of travel to Mr. Steve Vercelloni, Admissions Coordinator, by e-mail at svercelloni@law.uci.edu, or mailed to his attention at: UCI School of Law, 401 E. Peltason Drive, Irvine, CA 92697-8000. Your reimbursement will be processed immediately and mailed to the address you provide to us. Please note that UCI Law will only be able to reimburse the admitted traveler following his or her visit to campus.

[teiswei]

They'll be sending more info soon

[zot1]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

[sportsaholic763]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

[99.9luft]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

what makes you so sure? If they raise and maintain the medians to those of the inaugural class, i can totally see them having a ~20% placement rate.

[DoveBodyWash]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

what makes you so sure? If they raise and maintain the medians to those of the inaugural class, i can totally see them having a ~20% placement rate.

Not trying to a flame war regarding UCI's legitimacy...but i don't think LSAT medians are how firms determine which grads to hire... Eventually the market will will reach a natural saturation point for UCI grads (as it does with every school). At that point it won't matter how many favors Cheriminsky or other faculty call in. UCI placement will be at the mercy of the market (again, like every other school).

Obviously no one has any idea if UCI's placement will maintain at 20%-ish. But it is clear that placement for that first class was boosted by hardcore gunning by the faculty and tiny class size. 13 out of 56 is impressive only when it's expressed as a percentage. 13 grads is a pretty low number. I'm pretty sure even the current 3L class is bigger than 56..and class sizes will just bigger. Unless market demand for Irvine students grows at a faster rate than class increases, expect that placement percentage to drop.

[Dmini7]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

what makes you so sure? If they raise and maintain the medians to those of the inaugural class, i can totally see them having a ~20% placement rate.

Not trying to a flame war regarding UCI's legitimacy...but i don't think LSAT medians are how firms determine which grads to hire... Eventually the market will will reach a natural saturation point for UCI grads (as it does with every school). At that point it won't matter how many favors Cheriminsky or other faculty call in. UCI placement will be at the mercy of the market (again, like every other school).

Obviously no one has any idea if UCI's placement will maintain at 20%-ish. But it is clear that placement for that first class was boosted by hardcore gunning by the faculty and tiny class size. 13 out of 56 is impressive only when it's expressed as a percentage. 13 grads is a pretty low number. I'm pretty sure even the current 3L class is bigger than 56..and class sizes will just bigger. Unless market demand for Irvine students shoots up at a faster rate than class increases, expect that placement percentage to drop

Although I agree with this statement, I feel the Clerkship value is the number that would more than likely drop, and even though the big law percentage will probably see a drop too, that change would occur over a longer period of time. I think those qualified applicants that were unable to get clerkships will shift their focus towards big law if they truly are not interested in Public Interest/sector work as the school seems to present itself as.

I know the class size is small, and the 13 does not seem impressive, but considering that over 50% of the class had an outcome of a clerkship/biglaw from a school that is touting itself as public interest focused is quite impressive, at least to me.

[99.9luft]

Though UC Irvine is all about public service/interest, here's something to think about for those interested in the private sector:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 0125134458

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

what makes you so sure? If they raise and maintain the medians to those of the inaugural class, i can totally see them having a ~20% placement rate.

Not trying to a flame war regarding UCI's legitimacy...but i don't think LSAT medians are how firms determine which grads to hire... Eventually the market will will reach a natural saturation point for UCI grads (as it does with every school). At that point it won't matter how many favors Cheriminsky or other faculty call in. UCI placement will be at the mercy of the market (again, like every other school).

Obviously no one has any idea if UCI's placement will maintain at 20%-ish. But it is clear that placement for that first class was boosted by hardcore gunning by the faculty and tiny class size. 13 out of 56 is impressive only when it's expressed as a percentage. 13 grads is a pretty low number. I'm pretty sure even the current 3L class is bigger than 56..and class sizes will just bigger. Unless market demand for Irvine students shoots up at a faster rate than class increases, expect that placement percentage to drop

you def. make valid points, but let me add/clarify smth. First of all we don't know how many of the 56 wanted biglaw to begin with and, yes, i agree, it is not a representative sample, given that the next class will be 130, with the eventual goal of being about 200.

Of course higher medians don't get you a higher biglaw placement rate directly. However, higher medians demonstrate a higher likelihood of academic success (grades, clerking, etc.), thereby, indirectly increasing the chances of these students to do well at OCI. So, higher medians do matter. For example, in several years, i can potentially see an LA firm taking a UCI student for an SA position with a 3.7 over a UCLA kid with a 3.5. Given how much personal attention the faculty gives to UCI students, maybe there will be more 3.7s thanks to that, as opposed to the less personal enormous 1L sections at UCLA (obv. speculating)

A current UCI student (chase, i think) posted ITT that another UCI class had around 80 students, out of which 30-40 partook in the OCI. So out of those 30-40, 14 got SA positions, which is not bad and even got to penetrate the Bay Area market.

As far as the future trend, obviously none of us know what will happen, but I don't like the determinism that it will be certain that the 23% placement will be unsustainable. Many things can happen - UCI can get a kick-ass top 25 ranking in the first year, thereby, causing CA-wide firms to take notice and come to UCI's OCI IN DROVES (lol just kidding). Your market saturation point is valid, but, again, that's given how small the O.C. market is and that UCI hasn't really expanded itself all over CA. There is little reason to believe that UCI is incapable of consistently breaking (and staying) in SF/SV, for example. SD will be even an easier conquest.

So again, your market saturation point is also right given next year's 130 people class (let's say out of which 65 people decide to do OCI and 20 people get SA positions, which would not be not bad and would be less as a % striking out than at other, higher-ranked schools with big classes). Yet, this doesn't take into account the market expansion into other CA areas, the soon-to-be-published-rankings, and also the links to clerkships already held by UCI students (so it's not all Chem's favors, there will be a gradual positive reputation factor kicking in after a while when judges start remembering UCI kids - assuming they weren't awful, haha).

All in all, yes, i do see that 23% dropping in the next several years, but I believe it will go up again sonner than expected, due to the factors i outlined above.

[DoveBodyWash]

Not trying to a flame war regarding UCI's legitimacy...but i don't think LSAT medians are how firms determine which grads to hire... Eventually the market will will reach a natural saturation point for UCI grads (as it does with every school). At that point it won't matter how many favors Cheriminsky or other faculty call in. UCI placement will be at the mercy of the market (again, like every other school).

Obviously no one has any idea if UCI's placement will maintain at 20%-ish. But it is clear that placement for that first class was boosted by hardcore gunning by the faculty and tiny class size. 13 out of 56 is impressive only when it's expressed as a percentage. 13 grads is a pretty low number. I'm pretty sure even the current 3L class is bigger than 56..and class sizes will just bigger. Unless market demand for Irvine students shoots up at a faster rate than class increases, expect that placement percentage to drop

you def. make valid points, but let me add/clarify smth. First of all we don't know how many of the 56 wanted biglaw to begin with and, yes, i agree, it is not a representative sample, given that the next class will be 130, with the eventual goal of being about 200.

Of course higher medians don't get you a higher biglaw placement rate directly. However, higher medians demonstrate a higher likelihood of academic success (grades, clerking, etc.), thereby, indirectly increasing the chances of these students to do well at OCI. So, higher medians do matter. For example, in several years, i can potentially see an LA firm taking a UCI student for an SA position with a 3.7 over a UCLA kid with a 3.5. Given how much personal attention the faculty gives to UCI students, maybe there will be more 3.7s thanks to that, as opposed to the less personal enormous 1L sections at UCLA (obv. speculating)

A current UCI student (chase, i think) posted ITT that another UCI class had around 80 students, out of which 30-40 partook in the OCI. So out of those 30-40, 14 got SA positions, which is not bad and even got to penetrate the Bay Area market.

As far as the future trend, obviously none of us know what will happen, but I don't like the determinism that it will be certain that the 23% placement will be unsustainable. Many things can happen - UCI can get a kick-ass top 25 ranking in the first year, thereby, causing CA-wide firms to take notice and come to UCI's OCI IN DROVES (lol just kidding). Your market saturation point is valid, but, again, that's given how small the O.C. market is and that UCI hasn't really expanded itself all over CA. There is little reason to believe that UCI is incapable of consistently breaking (and staying) in SF/SV, for example. SD will be even an easier conquest.

So again, your market saturation point is also right given next year's 130 people class (let's say out of which 65 people decide to do OCI and 20 people get SA positions, which would not be not bad and would be less as a % striking out than at other, higher-ranked schools with big classes). Yet, this doesn't take into account the market expansion into other CA areas, the soon-to-be-published-rankings, and also the links to clerkships already held by UCI students (so it's not all Chem's favors, there will be a gradual positive reputation factor kicking in after a while when judges start remembering UCI kids - assuming they weren't awful, haha).

All in all, yes, i do see that 23% dropping in the next several years, but I believe it will go up again sonner than expected, due to the factors i outlined above.

+1

I've been tracking this thread and UCI for a few weeks just out of interest. 20% BigLaw, even if partly caused by a smaller class, is unprecedented for a brand new school and definitely an encouraging sign. Personally I think the percentage will drop as class size increase but will go back up again once UCI and its CSO adapts to operating with more graduates.

[sportsaholic763]

Another positive, with the obvious caveat that this will never hold up, sadly.

what makes you so sure? If they raise and maintain the medians to those of the inaugural class, i can totally see them having a ~20% placement rate.

Not trying to a flame war regarding UCI's legitimacy...but i don't think LSAT medians are how firms determine which grads to hire... Eventually the market will will reach a natural saturation point for UCI grads (as it does with every school). At that point it won't matter how many favors Cheriminsky or other faculty call in. UCI placement will be at the mercy of the market (again, like every other school).

Obviously no one has any idea if UCI's placement will maintain at 20%-ish. But it is clear that placement for that first class was boosted by hardcore gunning by the faculty and tiny class size. 13 out of 56 is impressive only when it's expressed as a percentage. 13 grads is a pretty low number. I'm pretty sure even the current 3L class is bigger than 56..and class sizes will just bigger. Unless market demand for Irvine students shoots up at a faster rate than class increases, expect that placement percentage to drop

you def. make valid points, but let me add/clarify smth. First of all we don't know how many of the 56 wanted biglaw to begin with and, yes, i agree, it is not a representative sample, given that the next class will be 130, with the eventual goal of being about 200.

Of course higher medians don't get you a higher biglaw placement rate directly. However, higher medians demonstrate a higher likelihood of academic success (grades, clerking, etc.), thereby, indirectly increasing the chances of these students to do well at OCI. So, higher medians do matter. For example, in several years, i can potentially see an LA firm taking a UCI student for an SA position with a 3.7 over a UCLA kid with a 3.5. Given how much personal attention the faculty gives to UCI students, maybe there will be more 3.7s thanks to that, as opposed to the less personal enormous 1L sections at UCLA (obv. speculating)

A current UCI student (chase, i think) posted ITT that another UCI class had around 80 students, out of which 30-40 partook in the OCI. So out of those 30-40, 14 got SA positions, which is not bad and even got to penetrate the Bay Area market.

As far as the future trend, obviously none of us know what will happen, but I don't like the determinism that it will be certain that the 23% placement will be unsustainable. Many things can happen - UCI can get a kick-ass top 25 ranking in the first year, thereby, causing CA-wide firms to take notice and come to UCI's OCI IN DROVES (lol just kidding). Your market saturation point is valid, but, again, that's given how small the O.C. market is and that UCI hasn't really expanded itself all over CA. There is little reason to believe that UCI is incapable of consistently breaking (and staying) in SF/SV, for example. SD will be even an easier conquest.

So again, your market saturation point is also right given next year's 130 people class (let's say out of which 65 people decide to do OCI and 20 people get SA positions, which would not be not bad and would be less as a % striking out than at other, higher-ranked schools with big classes). Yet, this doesn't take into account the market expansion into other CA areas, the soon-to-be-published-rankings, and also the links to clerkships already held by UCI students (so it's not all Chem's favors, there will be a gradual positive reputation factor kicking in after a while when judges start remembering UCI kids - assuming they weren't awful, haha).

All in all, yes, i do see that 23% dropping in the next several years, but I believe it will go up again sonner than expected, due to the factors i outlined above.

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

[Beachbum89]

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

I heard the class size for next year won't be that much bigger than this year's class of 120.

[99.9luft]

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

I heard the class size for next year won't be that much bigger than this year's class of 120.

hey BB, thanks for sticking around to answer our questions. What are your plans this 1L summer, if you don't mind sharing?

[zot1]

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

I heard the class size for next year won't be that much bigger than this year's class of 120.

Yeah, when asked about it, Dean C. said the class size would only increase as far as educational quality permits. 120 for next year's sounds right.

[teiswei]

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

I heard the class size for next year won't be that much bigger than this year's class of 120.

Yeah, when asked about it, Dean C. said the class size would only increase as far as educational quality permits. 120 for next year's sounds right.

So two 60 student sections?

[zot1]

All in all, really good analysis in my opinion. I'm loving this optimism + discussion here, and I am particularly curious about movement into San Diego. I am more skeptical than you on this front as well, but, being from SD, I would love to see it occur. Anyone know the exact class sizes they want for each of these years? Like, what about for c/of 2016? The full 200 or less still?

I heard the class size for next year won't be that much bigger than this year's class of 120.

Yeah, when asked about it, Dean C. said the class size would only increase as far as educational quality permits. 120 for next year's sounds right.

So two 60 student sections?

Likely. But for classes like Lawyering Skills (research and writing) where you'll need more individual attention, the class will be split into four.

[99.9luft]

i thought someone who had coffee with Chem earlier ITT said that Chem said that c/o 2016 will be 130...

...not that significant of a difference, anyway.

[butyourhonor]

bump from 2nd page.

anyone else applying?

I decided to apply today and it's fast becoming my first choice. I already live in CA and want to practice public criminal law so it just makes sense.

[CAteacherguy]

I just got back from visiting UCI and I'm pretty much sold on attending in the fall (*much* more sold than I thought I would be!).

While I was there, I met with everyone under the sun (a rep. from admissions, three folks from Career Development, and two 2Ls [one chosen by the CDO and one that I arranged a meeting with on my own in advance]). The energy of the school just seems so different from that of all of the other law schools I've visited... very positive, friendly, and non-competitive. I loved all three of the CDO folks and really can't imagine a nicer set of people to work with... and that's important to me, given how much time I anticipate I'll need to spend working with them! It also didn't hurt that the weather was even nicer than in the Bay Area.

I'm also excited to see the $300 reimbursement budget for ASW (with up to $200 more reimbursable for folks who actually end up enrolling). I should be able to get my plane ticket, rental car, and hotel completely reimbursed. Anyone else planning on going?

-CAtg

[99.9luft]

I just got back from visiting UCI and I'm pretty much sold on attending in the fall (*much* more sold than I thought I would be!).

While I was there, I met with everyone under the sun (a rep. from admissions, three folks from Career Development, and two 2Ls [one chosen by the CDO and one that I arranged a meeting with on my own in advance]). The energy of the school just seems so different from that of all of the other law schools I've visited... very positive, friendly, and non-competitive. I loved all three of the CDO folks and really can't imagine a nicer set of people to work with... and that's important to me, given how much time I anticipate I'll need to spend working with them! It also didn't hurt that the weather was even nicer than in the Bay Area.

I'm also excited to see the $300 reimbursement budget for ASW (with up to $200 more reimbursable for folks who actually end up enrolling). I should be able to get my plane ticket, rental car, and hotel completely reimbursed. Anyone else planning on going?

-CAtg

that's great to hear, man. I have yet to hear smth negative about UCI from those who actually visited UCI. We should start a UCI ASW thread if enough people are interested.

[teiswei]

I just got back from visiting UCI and I'm pretty much sold on attending in the fall (*much* more sold than I thought I would be!).

While I was there, I met with everyone under the sun (a rep. from admissions, three folks from Career Development, and two 2Ls [one chosen by the CDO and one that I arranged a meeting with on my own in advance]). The energy of the school just seems so different from that of all of the other law schools I've visited... very positive, friendly, and non-competitive. I loved all three of the CDO folks and really can't imagine a nicer set of people to work with... and that's important to me, given how much time I anticipate I'll need to spend working with them! It also didn't hurt that the weather was even nicer than in the Bay Area.

I'm also excited to see the $300 reimbursement budget for ASW (with up to $200 more reimbursable for folks who actually end up enrolling). I should be able to get my plane ticket, rental car, and hotel completely reimbursed. Anyone else planning on going?

-CAtg

that's great to hear, man. I have yet to hear smth negative about UCI from those who actually visited UCI. We should start a UCI ASW thread if enough people are interested.

I'll be there. Can't promise I can spend a whole night out with a group but I can grab a drink. I have to sell my fiancée on Irvine over Chicago. Luckily Chicago stays cold until the end of May.

[drr117]

I just got back from visiting UCI and I'm pretty much sold on attending in the fall (*much* more sold than I thought I would be!).

While I was there, I met with everyone under the sun (a rep. from admissions, three folks from Career Development, and two 2Ls [one chosen by the CDO and one that I arranged a meeting with on my own in advance]). The energy of the school just seems so different from that of all of the other law schools I've visited... very positive, friendly, and non-competitive. I loved all three of the CDO folks and really can't imagine a nicer set of people to work with... and that's important to me, given how much time I anticipate I'll need to spend working with them! It also didn't hurt that the weather was even nicer than in the Bay Area.

I'm also excited to see the $300 reimbursement budget for ASW (with up to $200 more reimbursable for folks who actually end up enrolling). I should be able to get my plane ticket, rental car, and hotel completely reimbursed. Anyone else planning on going?

-CAtg

that's great to hear, man. I have yet to hear smth negative about UCI from those who actually visited UCI. We should start a UCI ASW thread if enough people are interested.

I really want to make it to ASW, but it might not be practical to travel from NY for it.

[sportsaholic763]

Anyone else thinking about doing the 5K run the Sunday morning of ASW?

[cheymao]

I will definitely be attending ASW!

Anyone else thinking about doing the 5K run the Sunday morning of ASW?

I was thinking about it. Anyone else interested in a friendly TLS competition?

[countmein]

More good news for UCI

--LinkRemoved--

[sportsaholic763]

I will definitely be attending ASW!

Anyone else thinking about doing the 5K run the Sunday morning of ASW?

I was thinking about it. Anyone else interested in a friendly TLS competition?

Sounds doable.