Print

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

[glob157]

Hi guys : I'm a software consultant and bioinformatician  with a phd ..... I wanted to go to concord and study the patent bar to plan for a career change, right now I'm working with a startup software company.


I'm wondering why there is so much chatter on thus site about the state bar exams --- I thought he uspto only required the PATENT bar.... So shouldn't an online school like concord, in this regard, be sufficient?

Also, I've heard that only top schools are worth going to, but in contrast, I've also heard that there is a lack of scientists with patent credentials , and that patent attorneys are judged using different metrics then the same old pedigree-oriented recruitment of yesterday.

To investigate this , I asked th concord admissions to connect me with their alumni who successfully became patent attorneys, but they said they could not ue to confidentiality issues.

I know gene Quinn is an advocate of the school, and also a professor (he runs the PLI course), and he mentioned that, for patent attorneys, concord was a good choice,

So...... Is there any end to this confusion? My gut tells me that passing the patent bar, having an ms+phd, and an online degree from Concord should be sufficient o get my foot in the door doing ip work.... But I really need advice before  investing the $!!!

[turbotong]

1. Online degrees are crap.
2. You only need the USPTO exam to work as a patent "agent" and do not need a law degree at all.  You can only represent your client to the USPTO and not to courts.
3. You need a J.D (law degree) to work as a patent "attorney/lawyer."  You can handle more tasks for your client including representing them to courts.
4. Jobs are still hard to get.  Go to a top school.
5. Concord's non-release of statistics and information is an intentional mask to hide the mass numbers of failures they've probably graduated.  The top schools will release employment figures (though these are arguably skewed until the ABA grows some balls and actually decides to enforce rules)

[glob157]

Wow really? Are their stats to back this up? I'm surprised know one has come up with a clear, evidence based treatment of concord or other such schools for a patent Attorny career.

I have a friend who graduated from a low tier school that is now in dc at a top firm getting paid well - they needed people. So I'm somewhat optimistic..... Do you know any patent attorneys who are out of work ?

[WTF_Over]

Wow really? Are their stats to back this up? I'm surprised know one has come up with a clear, evidence based treatment of concord or other such schools for a patent Attorny career.

I have a friend who graduated from a low tier school that is now in dc at a top firm getting paid well - they needed people. So I'm somewhat optimistic..... Do you know any patent attorneys who are out of work ?

Notwithstanding their shitty reputation, "concord" spells its name with a capital "C".  I'm told that they sometime spell the school's name correctly on the diplomas they mail out periodically to graduates, a graduate being defined as one whose tuition checks cashed without incident.

Beyond that, there is little worth saying on the question.

[glob157]

Okay.... well , Im still waiting for some evidence here .......... I realize there are alot of passionate feelings about these online places, but, like i said, this is a really serious decision so I really wanted a sincere answer .....  Generalities aside ---- Has anyone truly reviewed these places ?

[George White]

I'm a patent agent. No law school experience. After three months of studying (I did use an expensive 37 CD set of instructional material) I passed the patent bar. If you only want to do patent prosecution there is no need for any law school degree. Additionally it is unlikely that USPTO rules and procedures are taught in a law school. I followed an ITunes-U patent law class from a major law school. The profs have not passed the patent bar and knew a tremendous amount about patent law none of which would be helpful for the patent bar and some of which would be misinformation.

--George

[turbotong]

Yes, I know of a few unemployed patent attorneys.  No, I don't have a comprehensive data survey.  Patent attorneys are better off than the other people. 
This seems to be a threat of people posting their own personal stats.  A grand total of 6 responses of a selected audience:
http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=168758
Other than that, I guess you could post a fake job opening and see how many graduated-from-low-tier-school-and-still-unemployed candidates apply.

[turbotong]

thread*

[NJ Patent1]

Glob:  States set their own requirements for eligibility to sit for their state bar exam.  If you are eligible, sit for and pass, and get sworn-in, they call u r an attorney in that state.  If you pass the patent bar and are in good standing in at least one state, you should get rgistered as an attorney.  Getting a job at a law firm is an entirely separate issue.

[khazzah]

My gut tells me that passing the patent bar, having an ms+phd, and an online degree from Concord should be sufficient o get my foot in the door doing ip work

The first piece of information you need is a list of the states which will let you sit for the bar with a degree from Concord.

I won't vouch for accuracy,but Wikipedia says:

No correspondence or online law schools are accredited by the ABA[1] or by state bar examiners.[2] However, twelve correspondence and online law schools, although not accredited, are registered by the Committee of Bar Examiners of the State Bar of California.

And Concord's own website doesn't paint a much rosier picture:

Concord Law School Accreditation
Kaplan University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) and a member of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA).* Concord Law School is accredited by the Accrediting Commission of the Distance Education and Training Council (DETC)** and registered with the California Committee of Bar Examiners.

If you can't sit for the bar in 49 states, what's the point of getting a JD?

[Isaac]

If you can't sit for the bar in 49 states, what's the point of getting a JD?

Well, the one state is California, which is a significant market.   Also, you can call yourself a Patent Attorney in any state. 

And... one might actually learn something about the law while pursuing a law degree.  I don't agree that patent prosecutors learn nothing useful in law school.

[George White]

Issac - I agree that law school of any kind would be helpful in prosecuting patents. What I said (or intended to say) was that the curriculum would not likely help with the USPTO bar exam questions. In the Itunes U Penn U Law School class I watched all 20 odd sessions of one prof. told the students you get a certain amount of claims at no extra charge - he thought it was 6. The other prof. told the class that one case was egregious because the applicant got something allowed in a CON that had not been allowed in the parent! It was egregious but only because the applicant provided misinformation about what was allowed in the parent in the filing of the CON.

I'm sure I would be a better patent prosecutor if I taken that class but it would not have helped with the patent bar.

--George

[Isaac]

Issac - I agree that law school of any kind would be helpful in prosecuting patents. What I said (or intended to say) was that the curriculum would not likely help with the USPTO bar exam questions.

There are law schools that have prosecution classes that are taught by practitioners.  I did not take such a course, but I did take a course in patent law that was taught by a patent attorney.  The class was helpful for passing the patent bar although it was not sufficient alone.

[khazzah]

If you can't sit for the bar in 49 states, what's the point of getting a JD?

Well, the one state is California, which is a significant market.   Also, you can call yourself a Patent Attorney in any state. 

And... one might actually learn something about the law while pursuing a law degree.  I don't agree that patent prosecutors learn nothing useful in law school.

Sure, I learned some stuff in law school. But I not enough to pay tuition -- even at the cheap in-state rates that I paid -- just for that learning.

So I'll revise: I wouldn't pay much for a JD that only allows you to sit for the bar in CA.

[NJ Patent1]

Karen:  This is a thread I find fascinating.  I too paid cheap in-state rates.  Could not have done it otherwise.  But I’m not 100% sure how I should best  understand you comment:

   “Sure, I learned some stuff in law school.  But not enough to pay tuition -- even at the cheap in-state rates that I paid -- just for that learning.”

I learned stuff in law school too, very little directly related to prep and prosecution.  But the courses in IP (survey), admin law, and federal jurisdiction were IMO later relevant to IP practice.  Sensing a “push” towards patent law (not my first choice of practice area) I took, at full private school price  , a course in patent law at a near-by private law school and transferred the credits in.  Unlike Isaac’s experience, the course - using part 2 of Baxter’s as the primary course book - was more about general comparative law btw jurisdictions.  Can’t say it was useless as I became aware, in general terms, that there were such things as PCT Chapters I & II, absolute novelty, first to file, problem-solution, etc to be dealt with. 

I don’t know if I would have “wasted” (my value judgment) the credit, and study, hours on a course that got into nuts-and-bolts of US prosecution, as Isaac’s (apparently???) did, were such available to me.  Objective was best possible grades and pass NY & NJ bars.  Admin law, fed jurisdiction, and even entertainment law were simultaneously relevant, at least in part, to the objective and in some abstract way to my ultimate employment in IP law. 

There’s perhaps a wider issue subsumed here:  what do / should law schools teach and what use to the economy is a freshly-minted and barred-up JD, ABA acreditation or not?  A whole lot according to some starting salaries.  But according to articles on “Above the Law”, there are clients who refuse to have 1st or 2nd years assigned to their matters.  They won’t pay for training.  Why should they?  That’s what law schools are for.  Hmmmm.

Concerning being admitted in CA only; I’m admitted in NY and NJ only.  True, if necessary, the possibility of sitting for the exam of other states remains open to me.  IMO the question is how would a prospective employer (or client if ur hanging out ur shingle) of a registered patent attorney perceive an on-line degree?  Dunno.  But, rightly or wrongly, I too perceive lack of ABA accreditation as a HUGE minus.  There may indeed be isolated success stories.  But my dollar against anybody’s dime says that the %-age of on-line grads starting at 150k + is statistically insignificant.  But who cares?  If it floats someone’s boat to be admitted in CA only, regardless of cost-benefit, and to be more concerned about doing good rather than doing; well go for it!  As long as they keep in mind that many (most?) student loans can't be written-off in bankruptcy (at least it was so when I took the course).