Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Smoore]

Hello all,

I apologize in advance for asking questions that have probably been answered on numerous occasions in prior threads, but I hope to collect some wisdom here without further surfing (I've been at it a good bit already).  Here's the skinny.  I've been practicing high stakes personal injury civil litigation for 8 years (primarily catastrophic injury and wrongful death) and am a partner at a small, pleasant firm.  I also happen to have a BA in Biology.  Over the last 2 years, I've wearied on the insurance defense side of the practice and have contemplated a career in patent law.  By contemplated, I really mean "wondered about," as I'm woefully uninformed.  I've looked at the requirements to sit for the exam and realize that I can technically sit for the test, but am I likely to be employable with a mere BA to accompany a JD?  If so, what sort of opportunities are out there?  It's also been a long time since I've sat for an exam of any kind.  This exam looks like the sort that one should not take lightly, but ... how much time are people putting towards studying?  Any ideas on how best to proceed (should I decide to do so) given that I'll be balancing a full litigation plate?  What review courses are the most reputable?  And perhaps most importantly, for those of you out there who practice patent litigation, what is your day like?  What do you enjoy about the practice?  What do dislike?  What should one expect (as in, what's common in the industry pretty much everywhere)?  I'm looking for the skinny about what it means to practice patent litigation, and what's enjoyable/frustrating about it.

Now that I've posed some questions broad enough to require volumes in response, I'll apologize again.     But seriously, thanks for the indulgence.

[Wiscagent]

I assume you know that to practice patent litigation, it is not necessary to be a patent attorney.  It would probably be a good thing to have on your resume, but being a patent practitioner is only necessary if you wish to represent clients before the PTO in patent matters.

[Smoore]

I'm aware of that, but I'm already an attorney.

[saintlos]

I think Wiscagent was trying to say that you don't have to pass the Patent Bar (and become a "Patent Attorney") in order to work in IP Litigation.

[Smoore]

I believe (knock on my keyboard) that I understand this point, but as I am already an attorney, it seems as though I should go ahead and take the exam (if I am going to enter the field at all) in order to engage in the full range of services (provide opinions on the validity of patents when litigation is contemplated, etc.).  But perhaps not?  What are the real advantages, if any?  What's it like to practice as a patent agent?  a patent attorney?

[Lxw]

I believe (knock on my keyboard) that I understand this point, but as I am already an attorney, it seems as though I should go ahead and take the exam (if I am going to enter the field at all) in order to engage in the full range of services (provide opinions on the validity of patents when litigation is contemplated, etc.).  But perhaps not?  What are the real advantages, if any?  What's it like to practice as a patent agent?  a patent attorney?

As a patent prosecutor, you would have to deal with me, or clones thereof.  It takes a few years, upwards of five, to become fully versed in the prosecution of patents, imo, so you can say that you fully managed X number of applications to allowance.  Do you really want to invest that kind of time just to put it on your resume?

[Wiscagent]

To become a registered patent attorney Smoore would have to study for roughly 100 hours and spend a few hundred dollars.

If all goes well, in a few months Smoore would have a registration number, a certificate to hang on the wall, and the right to call himself (herself?) a "patent attorney".  Without intending to be at all sarcastic, that may be worthwhile for Smoore; the cachet of "patent attorney" might have some tangible value even if Smoore never practices before the PTO.

A related, but separate question is: what would be involved for Smoore to draft patent applications and represent clients before the PTO in patent matters.  I agree with other posters that it takes quite a bit of seasoning before Smoore will be able to do a good job at that.

[rozerjack]

I know all the things but i have the best Lawyer to help me out for all this queries. The lawyer can handle all these things very easily and make me sure for the best output.

--------------------------------------
Personal Injury Lawyer

[10YearReg]

Wisc Agent makes a great point.

Putting "patent lawyer" on your resume would have value even with zero experience in patent prosecution.

For litigation, no, a reg number is not required - but in the places I worked, if you didn't have a reg number, it didn't matter if you were from Yale - you were put on paper duty only.

With regards to a BA in bio, that's about as weak as you get.  There are some prosecution jobs out there for you, but in bio there is an emphasis on degree, and BA means you'll always be the dregs.

With regard to litigation, the BA will matter a lot less - if you get into patent litigation, or if that's your goal, it's my opinion that the Reg Number is a very nice qualification to have on your resume.