Print

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

[thebourbaki]

Greetings all,

I have posted recently regarding qualifications for a move into patent law.  After reading nearly everything online I can find, I have a few more questions regarding options specific to my situation.  I will also combine your advice with that which I find in the offline world.

I would like your advice on the best path to get to my eventual goal: practicing IP law in the SF Bay area, either patent law specifically or IP more generally.  Ideally I would like to work in a smallish boutique firm in the high-tech and green tech fields, or even start my own.  I know that it will take time and experience to get to that setup.

I have a family and my wife a career, which gives us a number of constraints, but here is my dilemma:

I have time, but would like to be on my way to the above in 5-7 years.  We currently do not live in the bay area, but Tennessee, and will be here for at least a few more years.  It seems I will have the LSAT and academic record to get into some T10 schools, but not the easy ability to move where ever.

Path 1: go to law school now, which would mean Vanderbilt (Not T10 but T20), and then try to move after law school.

Path 2: work in TN as a tech spec and/or patent agent (if possible) until we are able to move, and then go to law school in Bay Area.  This could be at Berkeley or Stanford (maybe) or if I don't get in, another bay area school.

Path 2 obviously puts me in law school later, but with a little more experience.  I guess the basic question is, if I know I want to work in bay area, would going to Vanderbilt be advisable, or would I be better off waiting and going to a bay area school, no matter how good?  Obviously Boalt and Stanford are top top schools for IP, but better enough than Vanderbilt to justify waiting?  Would a local but lesser school (I am less familiar here, Hastings?) be better than Vanderbilt for these considerations?

For the time being, leave aside the costs.  Also, assume I get middling grades in law school because I am spending some time with family.  (and clearly getting top grades at Stanford will open many options.)

Cheers, and many thanks for your helpful advice.

[thebourbaki]

Perhaps that was too long?

Short question:  I want to work IP law in sfbay area. Would going to a lower t20 like Vanderbilt be a fine choice (this is easier for me at the moment) or waiting and going to a bay area school (boalt or Stanford or another lower ranked)?

Basically the first option I can do quicker and easier but would it be worth waiting for the other given I want to work in sfbay?

Cheers. I look forward to your opinions.

[blakesq]

IN this market, I think uprooting your family, making your wife lose her career to move to SF, is a bad decision.  Now, if your wife can get transferred to SF, then it makes more sense to me.  You really haven't given us much to go on.  What is your undergraduate degree?

[thebourbaki]

IN this market, I think uprooting your family, making your wife lose her career to move to SF, is a bad decision.  Now, if your wife can get transferred to SF, then it makes more sense to me.  You really haven't given us much to go on.  What is your undergraduate degree?

I certainly agree with your marital advice, I have no intention of tearing my family away to pursue a sky-high dream of patenting.

We will be here for at least 3 years, and we are all working towards making the move possible.

While here, it makes some sense to start law school now at a place like Vanderbilt, and when I finish, hopefully be ready to find a job in SFBay.  Or I could continue my current job until we move, and then start law school.

Hence my question, would getting a law degree from a prominent, or even not so prominent bay area school be a much better bet and therefore worth putting off for a few years, or would a degree from lower T20 outside the bay area be fine for the bay area.

I have the requisite academic qualifications for both patent law and T10 law school (although I am not able to move all over the country for the whichever top rated program I happen to get into).

Is this clearer?  Many thanks for your help.

[khazzah]

Hence my question, would getting a law degree from a prominent, or even not so prominent bay area school be a much better bet and therefore worth putting off for a few years, or would a degree from lower T20 outside the bay area be fine for the bay area.

Your question is whether it's important to SF Bay employers that your law degree come from a SF Bay school?

I can't speak to that specifically, as I know nothing about that locale. That said, I don't think law firms in general care specifically about the location of your law school. They care instead about the law school's  reputation (e.g., tier, ranking).

However, firms do prefer to hire someone with a connection to their geographic area. Going to school in the area for 3 years is some degree of geographic connection. In that sense, it's definitely a plus to be in law school in SF Bay when looking for a job in SF Bay.

[NJ Patent1]

I would agree w/ Karen and raise an additional "observation".  When you say "Bay area firm", do you mean a strictly west-coast firm, or a "national" firm that has offices in, say, DC, Chicago, and SF?.  FWIW, all of my education is on the east coast and I've never lived further west than Chicago.  When I was looking for a new position, I got three interviews in SF from national firms (one firm flew me out from NY twice, but alas no cigar, loved SF).  IMO, a strictly local firm may consider the factors Karen mentioned more heavily.  At bottom, the rep of you school, your GPA, and your technical backgound will cary the most weight (but relocation would figure-in if you stay put).