Print

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

[roz77]

Hey all, here's my situation. I am currently going into my senior year at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, majoring in EE with a minor in physics. I currently have a 3.35 GPA. I'm going to be applying to a bunch of grad schools pretty soon now, I want to get my Masters in EE. After that however, I'm a little unsure of what I want to do. I could go work with a MS, stay and get my Ph.D., or go to law school. I was wondering about law schools. If I end up with a 3.35 UG GPA in EE from one of the best EE schools in the nation while also doing research for a year and a half, and then stay there for 2 years to get my Masters and have between a 3.7 and 4.0 in grad school (speculation of course), what would my chances be to get into some top tier schools? At this point, just assume I score at least a 170 on my LSAT.

[2ndcareer]

If you are looking to determine some probabilities of you getting into a top tier law school, there are good law school forums that you can go to discuss with other law school applicants (and read about the experiences of past applicants for various schools).

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=2

Additionally, there are published statistics on the range of GPA's and LSAT scores that each law school have accepted.

But keep in mind that these ranges are not absolute predictors.   Many good law schools will put emphasis on diversity of experience factors, such as prior work experiences, to offset low scores.

[NoCode416]

with "at least a 170 lsat" you will very likely have a few top 14 acceptances.

[WTF_Over]

Hey all, here's my situation. I am currently going into my senior year at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, majoring in EE with a minor in physics. I currently have a 3.35 GPA. I'm going to be applying to a bunch of grad schools pretty soon now, I want to get my Masters in EE. After that however, I'm a little unsure of what I want to do. I could go work with a MS, stay and get my Ph.D., or go to law school. I was wondering about law schools. If I end up with a 3.35 UG GPA in EE from one of the best EE schools in the nation while also doing research for a year and a half, and then stay there for 2 years to get my Masters and have between a 3.7 and 4.0 in grad school (speculation of course), what would my chances be to get into some top tier schools? At this point, just assume I score at least a 170 on my LSAT.

You should go do something constructive with your EE degree "from one of the best EE schools in the nation". 

This necessarily excludes patent law.

[patentatt]

Hey all, here's my situation. I am currently going into my senior year at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, majoring in EE with a minor in physics. I currently have a 3.35 GPA. I'm going to be applying to a bunch of grad schools pretty soon now, I want to get my Masters in EE. After that however, I'm a little unsure of what I want to do. I could go work with a MS, stay and get my Ph.D., or go to law school. I was wondering about law schools. If I end up with a 3.35 UG GPA in EE from one of the best EE schools in the nation while also doing research for a year and a half, and then stay there for 2 years to get my Masters and have between a 3.7 and 4.0 in grad school (speculation of course), what would my chances be to get into some top tier schools? At this point, just assume I score at least a 170 on my LSAT.

1. You're making generous assumptions about your future GPA and LSAT.  Be careful to avoid thinking that you are so different that statistics and averages do not apply to you (a common problem among law school candidates).
2. I think that the importance of law school pedigree is overstated for patent attorneys.  Because of our niche, it is less important that we go to a fancy school.  Also, because of the jobs and student loan crisis, even students at top schools are having trouble with employment.  Top schools are also less likely to give scholarships and merit-based aid.
3. Pedigree is important if you want to become a partner at a white shoe firm or become a law professor.  That applies to about 2-5% of patent attorneys.
4. I would be more concerned with minimizing debt than going to Harvard.
5. Try working in patent law before fully investing in law school.  You can apprentice or intern as a technical specialist or patent agent.  That will give you a sense of whether you will actually like the job that you might invest 3 years and $150,000 chasing.

[bleedingpen]

LSAT score determines everything.

If you are going to law school, don't waste your time on the MS.  It isn't going to help you in your career much.

And I don't agree with patentatt about law school pedigree.  Go to the best school that is affordable.  Of course, people's opinions about law school pedigree usually have something to do with where they went to law school.  But put it this way, if I have a resume for a T1 candidate and a T4 candidate in my office, the T1 candidate receives more consideration.

[patentatt]

Of course, people's opinions about law school pedigree usually have something to do with where they went to law school.  But put it this way, if I have a resume for a T1 candidate and a T4 candidate in my office, the T1 candidate receives more consideration.

Ha!

I graduated from a T1 (but not top 14) law school, thank you very much.

And, of course, if all else is equal, a T1 school is preferable to a T4 school.  But all else is not equal.  My point was not that applicants should masochistically insist on attending lower ranked schools with no apparent benefit.  My point was that pedigree must be balanced with debt load, and that debt will usually be a greater concern for a patent attorney.

Franklin Pierce (now part of UNH) is/was a T4 school that is famous for patent law.  It has produced many Federal Circuit law clerks.  Now, which school do you think is more likely to give you a scholarship or merit based aid: Franklin Pierce or Georgetown?  I know one attorney who went to GW instead of Georgetown because GW gave him a free ride.  He now owns his own home in Reston free and clear (graduated '10).  All things are not equal.

[bleedingpen]

Of course, people's opinions about law school pedigree usually have something to do with where they went to law school.  But put it this way, if I have a resume for a T1 candidate and a T4 candidate in my office, the T1 candidate receives more consideration.

Ha!

I graduated from a T1 (but not top 14) law school, thank you very much.

And, of course, if all else is equal, a T1 school is preferable to a T4 school.  But all else is not equal.  My point was not that applicants should masochistically insist on attending lower ranked schools with no apparent benefit.  My point was that pedigree must be balanced with debt load, and that debt will usually be a greater concern for a patent attorney.

Franklin Pierce (now part of UNH) is/was a T4 school that is famous for patent law.  It has produced many Federal Circuit law clerks.  Now, which school do you think is more likely to give you a scholarship or merit based aid: Franklin Pierce or Georgetown?  I know one attorney who went to GW instead of Georgetown because GW gave him a free ride.  He now owns his own home in Reston free and clear (graduated '10).  All things are not equal.

Fair enough.  I still prefer my T1 candidates (ignoring the Franklin Pierce situation, which is a damn fine school and has produced many solid patent attorneys).

I know that, at least according to some metrics (LSAT, undergrad GPA being big ones), that I am more likely to get a smart trainable candidate from a T1 than a T4.  In this market in which jobs for young attorneys are scarce, that would matter to me a lot if I were looking into law school. 

BTW, you bring up GW as an example school, where is GW ranked anyways?

 

[bald & chained]

You should go do something constructive with your EE degree "from one of the best EE schools in the nation". 

This necessarily excludes patent law.

I am curious as to what you consider "constructive" ?