Page 1 of 1
Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:06 am
by HistoneKinase
Hi guys. This may be jumping the gun a bit, but I want to know where I stand. Need some insight into not only what law schools I could get into, but whether or not my experience will be sufficient for patent law. This is for the future (as in 5 years later). Currently a PhD student in molecular cellular biology at a a top 10 research university's medical school. My undergraduate GPA is a 3.73 and my LSAT is a 178, which I will have to retake again since it will expire when I want to apply to law school (took it because I wasn't sure whether I wanted to do a JD or PhD and good god I hope it doesn't lower). I am also divided on how well to do in my graduate studies as I am focusing on getting research published. I could do somewhat lower on graduate GPA (B+) in exchange for research publications. I intend to take the patent bar and possibly get some experience while in school. Basically interested in either UCLA, USC, Berkeley, or Stanford since I want to stay in California. Also, my family owns property in the Bay Area and Westwood, so I would be able to live rent-free during law school. I've been reading a lot of JDUnderground though and they seriously scare the shit out of me. Is it sufficient to go to UCLA or Berkeley if I want to go into a patent boutique, or would I actually have to aim for Stanford? Keep in mind this will be about 5 years later.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:07 pm
by paul34
.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 1:50 am
by HistoneKinase
Blah, yeah I knew that they were doing some changes to the
patent agent test next year. I am trying to take it this summer, as my classes shouldn't be so bad in the spring quarter. Already downloaded the MPEP book. Thanks a lot for the advice, it was really helpful.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:07 am
by vacate123
.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:13 am
by JamMasterJ
vacate123 wrote:HistoneKinase wrote:Hi guys. This may be jumping the gun a bit, but I want to know where I stand. Need some insight into not only what law schools I could get into, but whether or not my experience will be sufficient for patent law. This is for the future (as in 5 years later). Currently a PhD student in molecular cellular biology at a a top 10 research university's medical school. My undergraduate GPA is a 3.73 and my LSAT is a 178, which I will have to retake again since it will expire when I want to apply to law school (took it because I wasn't sure whether I wanted to do a JD or PhD and good god I hope it doesn't lower). I am also divided on how well to do in my graduate studies as I am focusing on getting research published. I could do somewhat lower on graduate GPA (B+) in exchange for research publications. I intend to take the patent bar and possibly get some experience while in school. Basically interested in either UCLA, USC, Berkeley, or Stanford since I want to stay in California. Also, my family owns property in the Bay Area and Westwood, so I would be able to live rent-free during law school. I've been reading a lot of JDUnderground though and they seriously scare the shit out of me. Is it sufficient to go to UCLA or Berkeley if I want to go into a patent boutique, or would I actually have to aim for Stanford? Keep in mind this will be about 5 years later.
Do you want to draft patents, or do you want to fight in court over patents? In other words, prosecution or litigation? If latter, go to Stanford or Berkeley, but know that you won't be a very attractive candidate just because of your PhD. In fact, you'll be second in line after the EEs for litigation jobs, and everything will depend on your 1L grades. In fact, your PhD will be largely wasted as a pure litigation associate. If you want to do prosecution, screw Stanford/Berkeley - just go to wherever you get a 100% scholarship. With a 3.7,
I'm guessing you're not going to get a full-ride into Stanford or Berkeley. If I were you, I'd look at prosecution after living rent-free at your property and tuition-free at Santa Clara (my guess is anyone with a 3.7/170+ gets a full-ride to Santa Clara)
Stanford only does need-based aid, so that's false
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:14 am
by vacate123
.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:28 am
by vacate123
.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:33 am
by JamMasterJ
vacate123 wrote:HistoneKinase wrote:\Currently a PhD student in molecular cellular biology at a a top 10 research university's medical school.
Wait lets rewind. I missed something huge. You're planning on doing a PhD just so you can go to law school 5 years later? Don't do that.
Re: Patent Law Applicant
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2011 2:40 am
by stratocophic
Take things said ITT with a grain of salt, particularly when they advise you to take a full ride at Santa Clara over any hypothetical shot at Stanford. Not saying it's 100% wrong, but it's not a gamble I'd take. Full ride to UCLA or Boalt would be another story, but that's just how I balance the risk/reward. Tech background matters a lot for prosecution, but your school and grades can absolutely be a make-or-break element on your resume for getting you an initial interview at a satellite office for a major boutique like Finnegan/Fenwick/Fish. The grades and school are what will get you the initial interview at those places - maybe it's different at some of the 10 person patent mills, but I don't see any reason to shut the door on any options ITE.
Just my 2 cents after having gone through OCI and interviewed with a fair number of both general practice firms and boutiques (non-EE background).