Print

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

[Doug Anders]

The most annoying thing about this forum is all the engineers and scientists who hold out hope that patent law is this miracle job where they will make tons of money.  The idea that patent law is this golden gateway to the big bucks is really becoming tiresome.  It isn't.   Perhaps some idiot compared a partner's salary to a mid-level engineer's salary and made the conclusion, who knows.  

Fact number one.   Losing three years of income to go to law school probably won't be worth the loss of income and the cost of law school.  Expect most law schools to cost you over a hundred thousand dollars.

Fact number two.  Patent law isn't any more lucrative than other fields of law.  My friend in criminal defense makes a lot more than I do, and works less.  My other friend in immigration law makes about the same.  If you do waste three years where you could have been moving up in your company in law school, AND YOUR GOAL IS THE BIG MONEY, don't waste your time on patent law, go into personal injury or tax law instead.  

Fact number three.  There is a reason you became a scientist or an engineer in the first place, the mundane and repetitive area of patent law will probably bore you, and the high stress intensely competitive area of patent litigation will probably grind you down.  Do you enjoy losing?  Public speaking?  Jury selection in front of a hundred people?  Working all weekend?  Constant travel?  Getting yelled at by a judge?  Welcome to the world of a litigator.  

Please leave you idealized idea that patent law will cure your ennui at your current job.  Chances are, it is far worse in a cut throat firm than where your already at.  

[Enzo]

It's almost midnight on a Saturday and I just finished a brief due on Monday.  Doug, truer words were never said.  I would anecdotally guess that most people are attracted to patent law simply because they hate their current job.   I often see this look of despair on a young associate's face when he/she realizes that they now out of the frying pan and in the fire when drop three files on their desk at 4:30 on a Friday.  Welcome to the legal world sucker.  

[saintlos]

I don't think anybody is expecting miracles. People who decide to make such a significant career change usually do conduct at least some research, which includes getting opinions from people already experienced in the new field, like you. And then one makes an intelligent guess - is that something that I'd prefer doing over my current job (and not - "is that job perfect and flawless").

Now, from a practical point of view - I don't see why one must waist 3 years in college. I plan to go part time, for example.
Example from real life: my friend just passed the exam and immediately found a job as a patent agent (not attorney). He tried it, he likes it, and therefore will be getting his law degree part-time, while his employer pays for the tuition 100%!
So, it is basically risk free: you try it, if you don't like it - you're back to engineering

[aisle9special]

Fact number 1 could be broadened to include other advanced degrees.  The years I spent on my PhD could have been spent gaining industrial experience and earning income.  I think the smart route these days, if interested in most sci & eng disciplines, is to get no more than a masters.  I am a little bit proud of the work I did to fulfill the PhD, but the degree is not something displayed as a ~3x5 ft. poster on my office wall.  I keep it over a special shrine in my living room.

I'm interested in becoming a patent agent not because it will be enormously lucrative, but b/c it will open up more opportunities.  If an employer would send me through law school, great, but for now I'm enriching myself by learning enough to pass the exam and auxiliary things.  Learning how the law works is about as interesting as learning how nature works.  

Many research groups are cut-throat too.  I guess that high work loads, stress, etc. across many professional fields are causing people to look over their shoulder, or the rainbow, at other possibilities, but you're telling us that there ain't no gold pot except maybe in tax law & personal injury.  

[PA]

At least here in Atlanta, patent attorneys start out at 160K versus other attorneys at the same firms that are around 145K.  By the 6th year, that number can raise to about 250K with a pretty significant bonus potential.  Considering the cost of living here, that's pretty good money.  Are there other people I know who make more than me?  Sure, but I'm not sure the relevance of that.  It's pretty likely they'll always be others who make more than me.

If you go to a local state law school, many of which offer scholarships for the better students to stay in state, the school debt is quite manageable.  Part time law school is an option.  And another here has also mentioned that some firms, especially the larger boutique patent firms, do pay law school tuition for patent agents.

While you do work hard for the money and partnership is quite competitive, I wouldn't say it's mundane -- not by any stretch.  That said, blanket statements about the field (e.g., it's the golden gateway to big bucks) will not be applicable to everyone.  I suggest each person do his or her own research and manage expectations.

[Doug Anders]

<<I don't think anybody is expecting miracles>>

Wrong, I saw a post yesterday where a few patent wannabees where discussing the possibility of making $1.2 million a year salaries.   That is not a delusional miracle wish?  Sure, there might be a handful of Yale law grads that might see that in IP later on.  But not in the real world.

The reality is that patent law involves staring at a computer 50 to 60 hours a week for about the same salary as a senior engineer makes..

My goal with the post is not to dissuade anyone from becoming a patent agent/attorney, just to bring some reality back into the echo chamber that this forum seems to become at times.

[guest47]

<<I don't think anybody is expecting miracles>>

Wrong, I saw a post yesterday where a few patent wannabees where discussing the possibility of making $1.2 million a year salaries.   That is not a delusional miracle wish?  Sure, there might be a handful of Yale law grads that might see that in IP later on.  But not in the real world.

The reality is that patent law involves staring at a computer 50 to 60 hours a week for about the same salary as a senior engineer makes..

The salary ceiling for a design engineer is ~$125k.  It takes many years to reach this for most.  The typical starting salary for a patent lawyer with a good background is $125k, and the ceiling is much higher.  The salary is unquestionably superior and can be achieved with 3 years of school instead of 15+ years of work.

Furthermore, have you actually worked as an engineer?  You speak of monotony and repetition rampant in patent law, yet completely ignore the fact that 90% of engineering is NOT fun design work, but documentation, testing, debugging, costing, part sourcing, meetings, paperwork, etc.  It can be pretty mind-numbing.  Oh, and instead of protecting someone's valuable assets, you could be working to make sure someone gets a good picture on their TV screen.  Or you could help to design something that's been designed at least 10 times before but needs to be redesigned to lower cost.  Fun stuff.

As someone else mentioned, I expect most who are seriously interested in the field have done their own research and talked with practitioners.  I doubt too many who are taking the patent bar or going to law school are expecting a $1.2M salary to roll around anytime soon.  But they can sure hope for 2.5x what they'd start at as an engineer, with the possibility of far more advancement.

I don't see what graduating from Yale has to do with success once you've gotten your foot in the door at a firm.

Reality checks are good, but your post is overly condemning of those pursuing a patent law career for legitimate reasons.

[Doug Anders]

 <<I don't see what graduating from Yale has to do with success once you've gotten your foot in the door at a firm.>>

Those top tier firms that pay the big bucks won't even glance at you, let alone let you get your foot in the door, unless you go to a top law school.

This is a common misconception on the part of engineers looking for a panacea in patent law.  They look to the salaries of the big firms that hire from Berkeley, Stanford, Yale and then conclude that those salaries apply across the board.  When you compare averages, your including the these top law firm salaries.  If you do get into a top tier law school, then great you get that higher salary, and what I'm saying doesn't apply.  If you don't, then just realize that this golden dream you've created is merely setting yourself up for serious disappointment later on down the road.

The legal world is largely segregated between the top firms who don't want a second tier lawschool's name showing up on their website.  It cares about what clerkship you did, etc.  With very few exceptions, they really do care where you went to school.  You very wrong about your conclusion that experience will be the key to open that door.  

I know I'm upsetting a lot of you because you've invested quite a bit of hope in patent law.  Just be aware, a significant number of engineers become patent agents/attorneys end up back in engineering after slaving away as an associate for a handful of years.   In my firm, two weeks ago, one of our associates who was an MD, quite to return to medicine.  "Way too much work" he said.

[guest47]

<<I don't see what graduating from Yale has to do with success once you've gotten your foot in the door at a firm.>>

Those top tier firms that pay the big bucks won't even glance at you, let alone let you get your foot in the door, unless you go to a top law school.

This is a common misconception on the part of engineers looking for a panacea in patent law.  They look to the salaries of the big firms that hire from Berkeley, Stanford, Yale and then conclude that those salaries apply across the board.  When you compare averages, your including the these top law firm salaries.  If you do get into a top tier law school, then great you get that higher salary, and what I'm saying doesn't apply.  If you don't, then just realize that this golden dream you've created is merely setting yourself up for serious disappointment later on down the road.

The legal world is largely segregated between the top firms who don't want a second tier lawschool's name showing up on their website.  It cares about what clerkship you did, etc.  With very few exceptions, they really do care where you went to school.  You very wrong about your conclusion that experience will be the key to open that door.  

I know I'm upsetting a lot of you because you've invested quite a bit of hope in patent law.  Just be aware, a significant number of engineers become patent agents/attorneys end up back in engineering after slaving away as an associate for a handful of years.   In my firm, two weeks ago, one of our associates who was an MD, quite to return to medicine.  "Way too much work" he said.

Getting into the good-paying firms is a separate matter from what it's like once you're there.  It's fairly common knowledge that even at a top 30 school, you need to be in  the top thirty percent for typical biglaw if you're an ordinary student, but that OCI firms lower these standards significantly if you're a hard science major.

I agree that hopefuls should understand how much the name of their school matters.  But again, serious people are likely doing their own research and will come to this conclusion.  A separate post regarding the typical standards one needs to meet to achieve what they hope for would be helpful, but this is very different from berating patent law as it applies to T2 & lower students and creating the impression that it applies to everyone.

[Doug Anders]

Guest47,

I guess we've reached a point of common ground.  The intention of my post wasn't to condemn the desire of others to become patent attorneys, but rather to introduce a little reality to the forum.  

As I mentioned earlier, my post was inspired after reading a few other posts discussing million plus salaries, and others of the "I hate my semiconductor job, now for easy street and the major cash in patent law" genre.  

The reality is patent law can be rewarding, however, it is competitive, an insane amount of billable hours to get ahead and a leech on one's personal life.  I believe the readers of this forum should be exposed to this perspective as they parrot the salaries  of a Harvard law grad/Stanford electrical engineer back and forth to each other.

[saintlos]

Guest47,

The reality is patent law can be rewarding, however, it is competitive, an insane amount of billable hours to get ahead and a leech on one's personal life.

Could you, please, elaborate on the amount of billable hours and "getting ahead"? What would my week look like, realistically (as much as possible)?
About the "getting ahead", do you mean getting into partnership? What would be the amount of hours to reach that goal? And also, do long hours really mean so much that the skill comes secondary?

Thanks!

[Enzo]

I can't speak for other patent attorneys.  My workdays are usually 10 hours a day.  I go in an hour early and stay at least until 6 or 6:30.  Add to this a 3 or 4 hour block of writing or reading, usually at a coffee shop, on the weekends.  I'm a patent attorney with two state bar memberships, but I'm starting an LLM in tax law night school program on Tuesday night!   If you go to law school, aim for a more traditional transactional practice or a specialization like tax or commercial transaction.  IP seems to be "du jour" and consequently, its fast becoming an overcrowded field..  

[Enzo]

Additionally, I wouldn't be as negative as Doug Anders, but there is a lot of truth to his kvetching.  

[huskerdooo]

It is funny that I do not see any IP lawyers talking about going into engineering.  It would seem that many have a technical degree already.

If engineering salaries are so great and do not require a great time commitment, then why not go into engineering?

I'm thinking it is because of this..

Your salary result was calculated using:

Experience = 17 years
UnderGrad Degree = BS - Electrical Engineering
Graduate Degree = MS - Computer Engineering
Job Level = Senior Engineer
Discipline = Aerospace
Primary Skill = Software - Embedded
Industry = Aerospace
Clearance = None
Company Size = 250-1000
Location = CT
The salary result for your search is: $94,919

Now a first year lawyer survey for CT:
Bingham McCutchen LLP
$135,000  
Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels
$135,000  
Dechert LLP
$135,000  
Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP
$130,000  
McCarter & English, LLP
$125,000  
Edwards & Angell LLP
$110,000  
Edwards & Angell, LLP
$110,000  
Brown Raysman Millstein Felder & Steiner LLP
$97,500  
Pullman & Comley, L.L.C.
$95,000  
Robinson & Cole LLP
$95,000  
Wiggin & Dana
$95,000  
Murtha Cullina LLP
$90,000  
Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C.
$90,000

All second year salaries were greater than 100k.

[Guest899]

Yes, and all those millionaires running around Silicon Valley are all patent attorneys!  

How many of those firms are open to applicants not graduating from top 25 law schools?

Your making a false and naive comparison.

Also, your comment that you don't see that many IP attorney going into engineering is pure conjecture.  The overall number of patent attorneys is extremely small compared to the overall number of engineers.  Of course, even if half of all patent attorneys returned to engineering (a false assumption as many patent attorney have pure science backgrounds), it still not be a noticeable phenomenon.  

A far better question to ask is how many attorneys burn out after 5 years and seek another profession, or if their female, quite working and raise a family?  

Go ahead and google that info, the number will surprise.  Those firms will work you to the bone and spit out with little left.  Only a few rise to partner.  Do you know many law partners?  Most I know are one dimensional workaholics with two or three divorces under their belts.