Print

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

[moogoogaipan]

I work as a technical specialist at a firm where I have a close friend who is a tax attorney.  When I hang out with my friend and his associates, they all seem to express a negative attitude toward patent attorneys and especially prosecution attorneys.  They don't think they're "real lawyers."  One of the alleged justifications for this opinion is that, supposedly, patent attorneys find it easier to get hired by bigger firms even if their law school grades are poor. 

Is there any truth to this, or is it just where I work?  Is this widespread? 

[whokebe]

yes, in much the same way that many lawyers "look down" on physicians for having to "deal with blood and sick people"

[blakesq]

Patent attorneys are the black sheep of the legal profession.  I recommend that no one else take this "career" path. 

[DogDayPM 9er9er9er]

...especially prosecution attorneys.  They don't think they're "real lawyers."  One of the alleged justifications for this opinion is that, supposedly, patent attorneys find it easier to get hired by bigger firms even if their law school grades are poor.

I don't know if it's true that anyone can get hired at biglaw with "poor" LS grades.  Possibly true to say that the focus may be more on undergrad discipline and grades, and less on LS grades, so an electrical engineer maybe can get in with "poorer" LS grades than the polysci, history or Engrish major's LS grades.  But I think the attitudes stem more often from isolation of the groups.

If you look you can find at least some prep/pros attorneys who do little more than crunching through prep/pros (toss in an occasional FTO opinion).  I don't actually know any, but I've heard they used to exist in some numbers.  Anyway, though, when you get a bunch of generalists together and the topic turns to patent attorneys, this is often the stereotype you hear.  Well, if a guy does prep/pros and little more then isn't he essentially an engineer with an unused law degree?  With the generalists and the patent guys siloed away from each other as in many law firms and many corporate law departments, how do the generalists know what kind of work the patent lawyers are really doing?  They don't.  (And vice versa, by the way.)  So I think the generalists just assume most patent attorneys fit that stereotype, "engineer with useless law degree".

I must say that no one I've actually worked with seems to carry that attitude.  Maybe at first if incoming from a heavily segregated firm/law dept., but not for long.  Where I've worked the patent attorneys do a lot of licensing and settlement agreements (including negotiating), M&A work, litigation management, procurement/sales/services agreements on overflow, etc., and many joint projects involving patent and general lawyers working together.  The sharper edges of the stereotypes get knocked off fairly quickly (in both directions*) in that type of environment.  And when the patent litigation budget is >15X the general lit budget, it's kind of hard for the guys managing the small taters stuff to minimize your role. 

*- Of course for their part, many patent attorneys deep down figure that anyone who took mostly liberal arts/humanities and can't do differential equations, can't possibly be as smart as they are...

[Forrest Gump]

Who cares?

Patent prosecution has the best stress to salary ratio of any job in the legal profession.  If a litigator wants to belittle that, it is likely because he is tired of working such crappy hours for little or no more $ than a patent prosecution attorney.

Plus, litigators usually have some worthless undergraduate degree.  It isn't surprising that their feelings get hurt when they find that law school prestige, law review, or something else that they were really proud of doesn't mean jack in the patent prosecution field without a real undergrad degree.

[Obviously]

I have found that most trial attorneys without a technical background do indeed look down on prep/pros patent attorneys as engineers/scientists with useless JDs.  Patent litigators are an exception, especially those who have done prep/pros, but watch out for the patent litigator without a Reg. No. who will usually be envious of the Reg. No. club and try extra hard to show up someone with a Reg. No.

[bald & chained]

And let's not forget those patent prosecutors with JDs who are envious of patent agents - wishing they could take back those 3-4 years of law school and return the useless JD in exchange of 100K, since they end up doing the same work as agents even after law school (too bad law schools don't have returns departments, like stores.) And, of course, patent agents are often envious of patent examiners, since the private practice does not pay much more than the PTO but adds a whole lotta of stress and work. Patent examiners, on the other hand, are envious of their engineering friends who are actually doing something constructive, like designing stuff, rather than being glorified human search engines.  But the hard-core engineers are envious of their former engineer friends who dropped engineering, went into finance and are (or were) making a killing on Wall Street.  And the really smart quants are probably jealous of their friends in academia.  But then professors sometimes quit and become patent attorneys, thus completing the circle.

I've also heard, although this is not a proven fact, that everyone in the group above is probably jealous of Kris Kristofferson - a Rhode's scholar, athlete, helicopter pilot, and a famous musician and actor.

[stuffball]

biggest lol in like 9 miserable years.

well done ts.

noway k^2 is rhodes scholar.  are you serious?

awesome.

[moogoogaipan]

Is it true that trademark attorneys are considered to be "real lawyers" and patent attorneys are not?

[klaviernista]

Is it true that trademark attorneys are considered to be "real lawyers" and patent attorneys are not?

There is some stigma towards patent prosecution attorneys, and some of it is well deserved.  There is a big difference between a prosecutor who simply grinds out applications and responds to OA's, and a prosecutor who continuously keeps up to date with the law and modifies his practice and advice accordinly. 

As to the specific question quoted above, I have not heard of a TM attorney being given more cred than a patent attorney.  Than again, I have never heard anyone who is familiar with the practice of patent or trademark law even suggest that patent and trademark practitioners are not "real" attorneys.