USC 2010! Forum

[msch0i]

I'm scared. This is most likely going to be my fourth rejection.

Keep hope. When were you guys previously complete?

Complete 12/15.

wow, really?! I went complete 12/21 and I'm still at complete! They must've loved your app

[jmhendri]

Or they're cleaning house. I think yesterday might have been acceptance day.

Sorry for the negativity. I'm protecting myself from the sting

[msch0i]

Or they're cleaning house. I think yesterday might have been acceptance day.

Sorry for the negativity. I'm protecting myself from the sting

Keep hope alive! (For my sake and yours . We both have similar stats..though your LSAT is higher!)

Btw, did you get an e-mail for when you went UR or DR?

[Shellbelle]

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

[jmhendri]

Or they're cleaning house. I think yesterday might have been acceptance day.

Sorry for the negativity. I'm protecting myself from the sting

Keep hope alive! (For my sake and yours . We both have similar stats..though your LSAT is higher!)

Btw, did you get an e-mail for when you went UR or DR?

Nothing yet... but I've been checking my status checker religously so I havn't given them much time to send one out.

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

Depends on your stats. I'd say it's quite a long shot at this point unless you've got an amazing application.

[StyrofoamWar]

Okay, those of you who have been admitted/denied so far...

Checked my status checker today...reads "Decision Finalized 1/12/10", went under review on 1/6/10. There's no new information about fees due or anything like that though, but I've heard that USC doesn't do that. No phone call either.

I'm expecting rejection, hoping against hope for an admit. Can anyone shed some light on their admissions practices, phone calls always, do they post fees due information, how long for the letter to show up? Thanks!

[Neelio]

Okay, those of you who have been admitted/denied so far...

Checked my status checker today...reads "Decision Finalized 1/12/10", went under review on 1/6/10. There's no new information about fees due or anything like that though, but I've heard that USC doesn't do that. No phone call either.

I'm expecting rejection, hoping against hope for an admit. Can anyone shed some light on their admissions practices, phone calls always, do they post fees due information, how long for the letter to show up? Thanks!

Good luck! Stats?

[jmhendri]

Okay, those of you who have been admitted/denied so far...

Checked my status checker today...reads "Decision Finalized 1/12/10", went under review on 1/6/10. There's no new information about fees due or anything like that though, but I've heard that USC doesn't do that. No phone call either.

I'm expecting rejection, hoping against hope for an admit. Can anyone shed some light on their admissions practices, phone calls always, do they post fees due information, how long for the letter to show up? Thanks!

You'll just get a letter pretty soon. The quicker it comes the better, as they sound out acceptances priority mail I believe. Rejection letters will arrive more slowly.


Notice how everyone in today's batch of decisions is skeptical about their chances? Not good. Yesterday's decsions were a bunch of Rothman invites and crazy impressive LSAT scores.

[StyrofoamWar]

Okay, those of you who have been admitted/denied so far...

Checked my status checker today...reads "Decision Finalized 1/12/10", went under review on 1/6/10. There's no new information about fees due or anything like that though, but I've heard that USC doesn't do that. No phone call either.

I'm expecting rejection, hoping against hope for an admit. Can anyone shed some light on their admissions practices, phone calls always, do they post fees due information, how long for the letter to show up? Thanks!

Good luck! Stats?

3.46/165. 2 years working at a major law firm, and some unique softs. I'm guessing I'm a long shot, with the lower GPA and only an OK lsat.

[Hopefullawstudent]

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

If you'd actually consider attending USC Law, then apply. If you're LSAT is actually a 170+, then you still stand a decent chance of admission. Still, you had better communicate why it is you waited so long to apply. Well, why did you?

Also, I'm curious. In your profile it says you have 5+ years of big law experience. In what way?

In the legal world, saying you have 5+ years in Big Law is making a huge statement. It means you've been an associate lawyer for a Big Law firm and that you may be making partner within the next 5 years. If you were an administrative assistant or something like that, then that is a completely different thing altogether and the statement "5+ years administrative work" is more appropriate. Administrative assistants in the corporate world don't go around saying they've "put in 5+ years at Goldman Sachs". This implies that the person is on the cusp of making senior associate.

[StyrofoamWar]

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

In the legal world, saying you have 5+ years in Big Law is making a huge statement. It means you've been an associate lawyer for a Big Law firm and that you may be making partner within the next 5 years.

What about paralegals? They're billing hours, working with clients, helping prepare briefs, researching, a whole lot of the same stuff a junior associate would do. You don't have to be an attorney to have big law experience, IMO. But you do have to be on the legal side of things, not the administrative.

[anniesaysrelax]

After a ding from UCLA today I'm hoping that good news will come from my DF that came up yesterday. Fingers crossed, as I have been dreaming of going to LA for a while.

[Hopefullawstudent]

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

In the legal world, saying you have 5+ years in Big Law is making a huge statement. It means you've been an associate lawyer for a Big Law firm and that you may be making partner within the next 5 years.

What about paralegals? They're billing hours, working with clients, helping prepare briefs, researching, a whole lot of the same stuff a junior associate would do. You don't have to be an attorney to have big law experience, IMO. But you do have to be on the legal side of things, not the administrative.

Few paralegals are qualified (by normative customs) to say they "work in Big Law", or "have put time in Big Law", or "have a background/experience in Big Law". If a paralegal wishes to convey that he or she works for a Big Law firm, then the statement is "I've put in X years at a Big Law firm as a paralegal", or, "I worked as a paralegal for a Big Law firm".

I know I am stating things with a high degree of nuance (as law students are taught), but that's because it is generally unacceptable to say "5+ years Big Law experience" unless you are an associate. Saying it that way is as if you are trying to gain points for being associated with a Big Law firm. Anyone who would actually care about that would follow up with: "Oh yea? Which firm and how are things looking?" Meaning, 1) they'll assume you're an associate, and 2) they're asking about your chances for making partner.

If you answer with: "I was a paralegal", let the awkwardness commence.

[StyrofoamWar]

Thinking about last minute throwing my hat in for USC - anybody have any opinion if it's even worth if or applying this late in the cycle would give me an automatic ding?

In the legal world, saying you have 5+ years in Big Law is making a huge statement. It means you've been an associate lawyer for a Big Law firm and that you may be making partner within the next 5 years.

What about paralegals? They're billing hours, working with clients, helping prepare briefs, researching, a whole lot of the same stuff a junior associate would do. You don't have to be an attorney to have big law experience, IMO. But you do have to be on the legal side of things, not the administrative.

Few paralegals are qualified (by normative customs) to say they "work in Big Law", or "have put time in Big Law", or "have a background/experience in Big Law". If a paralegal wishes to convey that he or she works for a Big Law firm, then the statement is "I've put in X years at a Big Law firm as a paralegal", or, "I worked as a paralegal for a Big Law firm".

I know I am stating things with a high degree of nuance (as law students are taught), but that's because it is generally unacceptable to say "5+ years Big Law experience" unless you are an associate. Saying it that way is as if you are trying to gain points for being associated with a Big Law firm. Anyone who would actually care about that would follow up with: "Oh yea? Which firm and how are things looking?" Meaning, 1) they'll assume you're an associate, and 2) they're asking about your chances for making partner.

If you answer with: "I was a paralegal", let the awkwardness commence.

Well put, but sounds to me more like a high level of personal preference than a high level of nuance, although there is definitely some nuance there as well. I've worked the last two years as a paralegal in a Big Law firm, during which myself and the rest of our department just tell people the name of our company when people ask where we work, without all the qualifiers mentioned above. When your job is representing big name corporations and meeting the demands and expectations placed on you directly by those clients (hence not on the administrative side of things), you work in Big Law. But, as I said earlier, that's just a personal opinion. There's no rulebook out on any of this.

[Faesha]

^ +1

[Shellbelle]

haha jeez I didn't know my comments on my profile would be such a big deal.

I've worked as a legal assistant/paralegal but been through some notable (and highly publicized) cases - as part of the actual trial team...not sitting here just making lunch reservations

I'm 170+ but for sure a splitter. Had candid chats with one recommender (SC Law Professor) and when we put together my school list didn't include SC for a few reasons...one being that I wanted a more intensive clinical program. I guess now I'm second guessing that decision...simple as that.

Guess I'll mull it over for a day or two...thanks for the input!

[GMUPatriot86]

So I checked my mail yesterday and saw a big envelope from USC and got all excited. I was pretty disappointed to find that it was a Rothman invite. This is the second one they've sent.

[msch0i]

So I checked my mail yesterday and saw a big envelope from USC and got all excited. I was pretty disappointed to find that it was a Rothman invite. This is the second one they've sent.

I'll take it

[Chelios]

Switched to decision finalized today. Really hoping that's a good thing [face_nervous]

[galahad85]

Any other Rothman invites still at Complete? This is starting to make me worry...

[brose002]

Just switched to in review today. How long has it been taking people to reach decisions after going in review? Previously I was complete on 11/10

[Mroberts3]

Any other Rothman invites still at Complete? This is starting to make me worry...

I got the invite and have been complete since Dec 18 (stupid dean's letter taking forever). How do I know if I'm under review? Email I assume? If so, then I'm still waiting too.

[brose002]

Any other Rothman invites still at Complete? This is starting to make me worry...

I got the invite and have been complete since Dec 18 (stupid dean's letter taking forever). How do I know if I'm under review? Email I assume? If so, then I'm still waiting too.

The only way i found out I was under review was via status checker. They never sent an email.

[CardinalRules]

Any other Rothman invites still at Complete? This is starting to make me worry...

I got the invite and have been complete since Dec 18 (stupid dean's letter taking forever). How do I know if I'm under review? Email I assume? If so, then I'm still waiting too.

The status checker changes to "In Review."

[crackberry]

Interesting hire for the Trojans. I think Lane Kiffin has a good personality for Southern California, but mainly I'm glad they didn't snipe Harbaugh.