The Intellectual Property Forum

Hello everyone,

I'm applying this application cycle and thinking about part-time programs (either GULC or GW) for enter patent prosecution later on. I have a BS and an MS in engineering (biomedical), with the BS from a state university and the MS from Cornell. Undergrad GPA is around 3.2, grad GPA around 3.9, and took the October LSAT to score around 168-172.

I've been considering part-time programs because 1) Both schools are in DC, which is the largest IP market, 2) I plan to work part-time/full-time as a patent agent or tech specialist at a firm to finance my law school debt, 3) From what I read, GULC and GW part-time programs seem less competitive (numbers-wise) than full-time programs.

My question is whether this would be a good idea if I'm hundred percent sure about IP law but not sure about prosecution vs. litigation. I will most likely have to pay sticker at T14s, so it seems better, financially, to go with GULC part-time or GW full-time over a T14, considering that both are in DC. I also have ties to D.C. and have networks with some recent grads that may help me apply for part-time/full-time jobs during law school.

Which option would be the best if my goal is biglaw after law school:
A) Go to regional school with a full scholarship,
B) T14 with minimal to no scholarship or
C) Part-time GULC or GW

thank you!

Everyone makes it seem like if you don't do EE or go to a T14 school, you will have no job prospects after graduating from law school.

I understand that there is a prestige factor associated with biglaw positions because of the salary, and that the market for electronics patents are great right now...but after reading all these posts in forums it seems like if you don't fulfill either of the two criteria above, you will remain unemployed.

Isn't patent law supposed to be a niche field? So why is T14 and EE background still such a determining factor for employment?

Hi everyone,

I'm a graduate student doing a Master in Engineering at Cornell. Recently got interested in prospects of patent law due to its integration of science and law (and because the demand is marginally better compared to other fields of law and salary caps are greater than an engineer).

My question regards the degree of education required to enter the field. From what I've read, advanced degrees help in all cases, and PhD is required for life-sciences. But how do these degrees compare for Engineers? I've already decided to pursue a JD and hundred percent sure about this but thinking about the technical backgrounds required to enter the field after law school.

M.Eng vs. M.S.
While M.S. degrees are research-focused and result in a formal thesis, my M.Eng program is focused on breadth and an industrial design project. Is one preferred over the other for an entry-level patent associate with a JD? Do employers make a distinction, or prefer either?

Masters vs. PhD
Everyone says that PhD is usually required for hardcore biotech patent work, which is understandable. However, what about someone with an engineering background? I'm in a biomedical engineering background, which intersects with biotech, but also has an industrial/engineering focus. Would an MEng be sufficient technical experience in addition to the JD?

T14 JD vs. Technical Background
For positions in patent law, how does your practice in patents correspond to your specialty. From a quick at profiles from top IP firms, associates have backgrounds from all over the place. Most of the younger associates have minimal industry experience. Therefore, is your area of practice based on your background (BS, MS) or your interests in law school? Is your technical background more important then the law school you attended?

Hi everyone,

Like everyone else, I'm at a transitional point in my career, where I recently graduated and need some guidance on how to begin my career (field, path, etc.). This forum, among other law forums have given me great guidance. But where general law forums provided me with law school advice, I wanted to get some feedback from patent attorneys on this forum, or recent graduates who've been through the process.

Background
I graduated last year with a Bachelor of Engineering in Biomedical Engineering from a public university in 2011. I am currently working on completing my Master of Engineering, also in Biomedical Engineering from Cornell, and will be graduating after this upcoming semester. My undergrad GPA was 3.21, senior year GPA was 3.60, and my masters GPA is 3.94.

I have a lot of research experience as an undergrad, including working at a National Laboratory for 2 years, and conference presentations, but no publications. At Cornell, my research project is focused on electrophysiology, optics, and disease modeling.

Why IP?
My initial plan was to enter industry after doing my masters, but in BME, the general consensus is that you need an additional advanced degree since it is a new discipline (PhD or MBA). I abandoned the PhD route because I did not like laboratory bench research and it seemed like that is what most BME PhDs within industry end up doing. I was interested in IP because (1) biotech and BME are growing industries, with increasing technologies which requires Patent Attorneys who have sufficient backgrounds in BME, (2) I have always been interested in the scientific communication and policy where IP intersects. I have a strong interest in patent prosecution, and always enjoyed technical writing and reading scientific publications for research.


Patent Law?
When I speak to my friends in law school or discuss patent law in general law forums, the impression of patent law has always positive: "Patent Lawyers are always in demand", "salary is great", "technical backgrounds of patent lawyers makes them a hot commodity", "IP firms tend to dip lower in school rankings, and prestige due to technical skillset of patent lawyers".

But coming to this forum, it seems that there is a general negative/critical perspective of patent law. I know that EE is specially preferred by patent law firms, but how would a background in BME, with a graduate degree in engineering be perceived by law firms?


Year between Grad School and Law School
I plan on taking my LSAT in June 2012, and retaking in October 2012, if necessary. I have already started studying for the LSATs with the intention of applying for the 2013 cycle. I understand with my undergrad GPA, I need to do well to be considered for the tier 1 law schools. However, this means I have one year between my masters and law school. Which one of the following would be the most beneficial for my career after I complete law school?

A) International Engineering Research Fellowship for Biomedical Engineers (currently applying, funded) - collaborating research with professor at Harvard
B) Full-time job within the Biotechnology industry (medical devices, diagnostic devices)
C) Full-time Research position at a University
D) Non-paid internship at the USPTO
E) Study for Patent Bar and Take (maybe only during summer)


Thank you for any advice you can provide!