Print

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

[Number_27]

I have BSEE (middling grades), 12 years practicing EE with supervisory experience (utility real time metering and controls, lots of hands-on with sensors, computers, RDBMS, networking, communications, electro-mechanical devices large and small), P.E. license, about 9 years utility policy/regulatory work at Manager level, MBA, and JD cum laude from second tier school.  Worked for slightly over 1 year as IP attorney at big law firm in big city before leaving 10 years ago for my current policy/regulatory position.  I have become increasingly dissatisfied with my job & now want to get back into patent law.  I plan to take PTO exam at end of year and have applied to a 12 month LLM in IP program to get back up to speed with developments in IP law, as well as obtain the more in depth education in patent law I felt was lacking from my JD curriculum (standard introductory Patent and Trademark classes).

In my circumstances is the LL M the way to get back in?  I have applied to several patent firms and it seems my absence from the field is a near insurmountable obstacle to returning to this practice area.  I'd like to hear from anyone who has re-entered the field or begun an IP attorney career in their late 40s. 

Also, I was not a very serious student as an EE undergrad with grades that placed me right in the middle of my class, and I despised having to explain that after my successful career as a EE in a very technical hands-on work environment.  My graduate in business and law work has been honors level.  How high a hurdle will my undergrad grades likely be now?

[UVAgal4]

I don't think undergrad grades will matter at all. However almost total lack of IP experience and a long time away from law school are probably the main factors. It would be like them taking on a newbie, in my opinion.

[Number_27]

Well the point of obtaining the LLM in IP was to adress time out of law school and absence from practice.  My question is whether the investment in LLM is worth it.  As you have identified my length of absence from and limited experience in IP then I guess your answer is yes.

[blakesq]

if I were an employer, and I saw your resume come in, indicating you are going back to school YET again for an LLM, after already receiving a JD and an MBA, i would think that you do not know WHAT you want to do, and probably would change your mind after being hired by me. 

If you are serious about patent law, skip the LLM, and go to work as a patent lawyer as soon as possible, with an EE background, you should be relatively sought after (although the economy sucks).  If you are willing to move, I would think getting a job would be relatively easy for you.  Good luck. 

[AnotherCog]

I don't think undergrad grades will matter at all. However almost total lack of IP experience and a long time away from law school are probably the main factors. It would be like them taking on a newbie, in my opinion.

Therein lies his real problem: firms just aren't hiring entry-level people.  An LLM isn't going to fix the economy. 

My advice would be to stick it out at my current job and wait for things to bounce back.  Once they do, firms will be scrambling to fill the ranks again. 

[horsechute]

"wait for things to bounce back.  Once they do, firms will be scrambling to fill the ranks again"

Maybe. But that will be another 4 (or more) years from now, and he will have then been away for 14 years. And maybe he does not like what he is doing. And for the LLM? You won't see many people giving it a lot of weight in previous posts in this forum. When times were good, maybe it offered a networking opportunity. Now, all you might get is a bowl of stale pretzels. And you would be taking a fair amount of non-patent courses. Maybe fun, but marginally useful. 

[Robert K S]

I think it should be pretty clear from the majority opinion voiced here that an LL.M. is not likely to help you win a job.

I can't think of an entry-level patent-related job that would be helped to get by the LL.M.

[horsechute]

You would be better off spending your time reviewing your EE. In some areas of EE, like communications, even 4 or 5 years is a lifetime.

[Number_27]

if I were an employer, and I saw your resume come in, indicating you are going back to school YET again for an LLM, after already receiving a JD and an MBA, i would think that you do not know WHAT you want to do, and probably would change your mind after being hired by me. 

If you are serious about patent law, skip the LLM, and go to work as a patent lawyer as soon as possible, with an EE background, you should be relatively sought after (although the economy sucks).  If you are willing to move, I would think getting a job would be relatively easy for you.  Good luck. 

I am serious and quite appreciate your insights regarding how you would view my resume.  It is in fact one of the reaosn for seeking the LLM.  I would think investing the year and money into an LLM would demostrate a commitment to patent law.  Along with obtaining my USPTO registration.  I am willing to move and getting back into patent law has not proven easy at all.  Were I to take a year off from the good salaried position I have had for 10 years, spend money on a patent law-intensive LLM (and it is, see reply to other poster below) and still a potential employer thought I was not committed enough for him or her then, to me, that reflects more on the employer.  I mean, after all, it's not like I haven;t enjoyed a successful & stable career thus far.   I am just wanting more earnings potential, autonomy & options as to where to live etc. with my career going forward.

I also like to know what I am doing and one of the reasons I left was my patent law education (one intro course) did not make me feel comfortable practicing in that area.

[Number_27]

"wait for things to bounce back.  Once they do, firms will be scrambling to fill the ranks again"

Maybe. But that will be another 4 (or more) years from now, and he will have then been away for 14 years. And maybe he does not like what he is doing. And for the LLM? You won't see many people giving it a lot of weight in previous posts in this forum. When times were good, maybe it offered a networking opportunity. Now, all you might get is a bowl of stale pretzels. And you would be taking a fair amount of non-patent courses. Maybe fun, but marginally useful. 

No maybe about it, I do not like what I am doing, the limted future earnings potential and lack of control over where I work.  It was interesting and allowed me to acheive personal family goals for a while, but more recently the negatives have come to significantly outweigh the positives.

By, the way, the LLM program can be almost exclusively patent related courses (need 20 class credits and 2-4 credit thesis), here's the curriculum:

Copyright Law
Intellectual Property and Education
Intellectual Property Law
Intellectual Property Litigation 
Intellectual Property Valuation
International Intellectual Property
Internet Law
Law of Start-Up and Emerging Companies
Music Law
Patent Law
Patent Litigation
Patent Prosecution
Right of Publicity
Seminar in Law & Technology
Sports and Entertainment Law
Trademark Law
Unfair Trade Practices

For a guy with only one intro to Patent Law course 12 years ago working out of the area for the last decade, the patent law courses alone are desirable.  And of course the fact that the classes are, for the most part, taught by adjunct practitioners in the area is great too, should open some doors.

Thanks for your input.  While I generally agree LLMs are not worth the money, in my circumstances I think it brings me up to speed on the law, provides a depth of subject matter knoweldge and training that I know from my earlier brief foray into the practice I lacked (relative to my associate colleagues at the time), and may well introduce me to my future employer.  The issues some have raised in this thread actually reinforce what I understand to be the weaknesses/concerns in my resume that my pursuit of the LLM is intended to address.  So I think I will respectfully dissent from the majority of responses to my request for advice while thanking you all for taking the time to respond and sharing your thoughts.

[Number_27]

if I were an employer, and I saw your resume come in, indicating you are going back to school YET again for an LLM, after already receiving a JD and an MBA, i would think that you do not know WHAT you want to do, and probably would change your mind after being hired by me. 

If you are serious about patent law, skip the LLM, and go to work as a patent lawyer as soon as possible, with an EE background, you should be relatively sought after (although the economy sucks).  If you are willing to move, I would think getting a job would be relatively easy for you.  Good luck. 

I think the other point is "willing to move" & "able to move" these days are different things.  Unlike the corporations I have worked for, law firms generally do not like relocating people.  So I need to plan on not being able to move and working where I am, while hoping and working to move.  Therefore, how can I quickly improve my marketability to the local IP firms who up until now have shown no interest? 

I guess I don't see the professional disconnect between MBA and JD that reveals some lack of career direction.   I know many who have both law and business degress, and the combination certainly got me the well paid job I have had for the past 10 years (with my EE and operations background), which I no longer enjoy.  So what's the problem with now seeking an LLM in an area of the law I have been absent from for a while and now want to return to?  It's not like I am thinking about dental school.

I don't mean to pick a fight as you are kind to take the time to share  your thoughts.  I do think your view of my resume is the obstacle I am facing today, and will be less so if I invest my time & money on getting an IP LLM.  Maybe I am wrong.  Another reason for an LLM is I don;t want to be a patent attorney, I want to be a good patent attorney.  Putting aside developments in the law since 2001, my prior education/training in this specialized practice area was in my view lacking in comparison to my first year colleagues, many of whom attended more IP oriented law schools. 

Sure, there's nothing like on the job training, but at 48 I got to accelerate the learning curve.

[Robert K S]

Is an LL.M. usually just J.D.-level elective coursework like that?

[Number_27]

Is an LL.M. usually just J.D.-level elective coursework like that?

Yes, plus independent research/thesis paper.  While I went to a highly ranked state law school it was not IP-centric.  Those electives, drafting claims, prosecution etc. were never offered.

[blakesq]

The problem with an LLM is that you don't learn how to be a patent lawyer by going to school.  You learn by actually doing it--working as a patent lawyer.  Hence, forget the LLM, its a waste of time and money, and get your first job as an entry level patent attorney with lots of EE experience.  I see tons of ads for EE patent attorneys in California, NY, DC. 

[horsechute]

Let's not forget that an LLM is not free.