High school student seeking career advice from patent professionals

[Collin Hu]

A little bit about myself.

I am currently a junior in a Canadian high school. With a broad range of interests and talents in both social science (politics, history and etc.) and hard sciences, I would be glad to study either one of those. However a combination of both would be excellent. However, I don't really excel in mathematics to the degree that I would be a game changing engineer or scientist.

However, I am concerned about the nature of the work of a patent attorney in the US (because that is where I would like to end up) -
     
  1. Does being a patent attorney requiring creativity? Is it like being an accountant in the sense of JUST accurately presenting the state of the invention?  (That is what I worry about and hate the most - work with no intellectual challenge or creative thinking)
     
2. Is it the perfect job that I imagine as to possibly working with brilliant inventors to understand their innovative products and protect them with my knowledge of the law? Thus, acting an important role to fuel human scientific innovation?
     
3. Is it more technical than I think? For example, are good patent attorneys usually good engineers too?
       
4. What are the most essential talents/skills required to succeed in this profession? (From what I have gathered: technical understanding, oral and written communication skills, social skills and critical thinking? Is that it?)
     
5. What advice would you give me as to wanting to pursue this profession in order to combine scientific and legal knowledge to advance human society? (I am indeed too idealistic and innocent )



I am extremely grateful for anyone who is willing to give me any advice which will be precious and may well be a light that leads to the right career and life path. Thank You
       

[MYK]

Dealing with the USPTO is a lot like dealing with the DMV.

The job can be analogized to piecing together a part of a jigsaw puzzle.  You figure out what the hole in the field of all prior art is, then you try to maximize the shape and size of what you're fitting into that hole.  Doing so further requires that you take into account the existing rules and possibly trying to guess at future rules that may be imposed.

The skills for being a good patent attorney are more verbally oriented than the skills for being a good engineer, but are related.  You would most likely need to understand the scientific and/or engineering background surrounding an invention in order to do a good quality writeup and figure out how best to cover up that hole.

That said, it's at least four years too soon for you to think about it, as you'll need to get an engineering or science degree, and depending on what field you go into, there may or may not be demand for your knowledge in the patent field.  Or maybe you'll enjoy engineering too much to drop it to go into law.  Or a lot of other things.

[Collin Hu]

  Thank you so much for the reply

You are absolutely right, it is too early to decide what I would like to do for the rest of my life. However, it is very helpful in both mental and practical terms to have a direction to work and study towards

I would most likely want to enter electrical engineering, since the bio/chem requires too much scientific education to be competent.

I guess what I am really wondering is that is patent attorney a job that indeed combines business, technology and law? (Very broad and vague question...sorry)
[/size]

Once again I appreciate you a lot for helping me

[MYK]

Are you choosing EE because you hear that's what's in demand for patent work, or because you're actually interested in it?

[Collin Hu]

I am genuinely very into math, physics and chemistry. Engineering also sounds pretty interesting, as that I love problem solving. As to which branch of engineering, I still have two years to decide, but EE seems to be what's in demand for patent law, so...

[Robert K S]

Depending on one's professional style, there is plenty of room in patent law for creativity.  Patent law is not always working to conform with the expectations of a bureaucracy, but often involves challenging the bureaucracy, which can require a deep understanding of the law and its purposes.  In such circumstances the practitioner may muster both creative thinking and creative writing.  There is also a good deal of professional judgment involved in trying to determine which among a number of options should be exercised to accomplish client goals within available resources and thus to maximize value to the client.  Such judgment is honed over years of experience, but must not become staid, lest more creative, more rewarding options be ignored.  $0.02.

Not a lot of people start off undergraduate school saying, "I want to be a patent attorney," so you're in an interesting position.  Explore all options and have as much fun as you can with engineering school, should you decide that's what you want to do.

[Collin Hu]

Thank you so much for replying

Would you so a patent attorney is a lawyer who knows science or an engineer who knows law?
In other words, is the "law side" more important or the "science side"? I understand both are inseparable in the practice of patent law, however does the importance of one outweighs the other when it comes to trying to succeed in this field?

I'm actually still in grade 11, so 2 yrs till undergrad . Just trying to explore my options and hopefull finding a direction to work towards.

[Robert K S]

Would you s[ay] a patent attorney is a lawyer who knows science or an engineer who knows law?

Even if a person starting in the patent field more resembles the latter, the seasoned patent professional will tend to be more the former, for several reasons.  First, the day-to-day does not consist of scientific or engineering work, but of analyzing documents and formulating arguments and strategies, which is the soul of legal work.  Second, a patent attorney is generally not in the elite in terms of technical understanding, nor would it be practical for him or her to be, since that would mean that his or her technical focus would be very narrow, limiting the variety of inventions he or she would be able to support.  Most patent attorneys find themselves having to learn some new technical principle with every case, which makes sense, since every patentable invention ostensibly possesses technical novelty.  Finally, it is little hindrance for an attorney to be less than expert in the technical field of the invention, since, in most cases, the attorney can consult with the inventors or other specialists to obtain the answers he or she needs to draft, prosecute, litigate, license, assign, or whatever the work may be.

[Tobmapsatonmi]

I don't have a lot to add generally to what MYK and Robert K S have already provided.  I especially liked Robert's description of starting off more as an engineer with a law degree and progressing to the other end of the spectrum.

I wanted to mention a caution about EE given your initial comment about math.  If you mean you tend to learn math fine when you need to learn it and hang onto it while you're using it, but otherwise aren't a mathematician, that should be fine.  But if you mean you're struggling in your AP calc class, you might want to be sure you understand what you may be getting into math-wise when it comes to EE.

There are a lot of "what's it like" threads scattered throughout the fora here but the search tool's not working well.  A work around is to use google as in the link below, which I've pre-filled with "day+in+the+life" to pull up quite a few threads.  Sub in other keywords for "day+in+the+life" (e.g., "job+satisfaction") and you can probably get a lot of bits of information answering your original questions 1-5.  (Well, maybe less commentary for the "advancing human society" part of #5.)   

https://www.google.com/#q=site%3Awww.intelproplaw.com+%22day+in+the+life%22

[MYK]

I'd suggest looking for Snookman's old threads.  He was in a similar situation, except that (I assumed, anyway) he's already an American citizen so he wouldn't have to deal with the limited-recognition and visa stuff.

[Tobmapsatonmi]

I'd suggest looking for Snookman's old threads.  He was in a similar situation, except that (I assumed, anyway) he's already an American citizen so he wouldn't have to deal with the limited-recognition and visa stuff.

Good reminder, there was a lot of material there. (Edit to add, here's Snookman77's post list: http://www.intelproplaw.com/ip_forum/index.php?action=profile;u=364708;area=showposts;start=45)

But as for citizenship, doesn't Canada get general "reciprocity" with USPTO?  All the Canadian patent agents I deal with are USPTO registered as well.

(Put "reciprocity" in quotes because I don't think it runs the other direction...)

[MYK]

My understanding, perhaps incorrect, is that Canadian USPTO-registered agents only get "reciprocity" to work in Canada on Canadian applicants' applications.  If OP wants to work in the U.S. at an American firm on applications from everywhere, he's treated just like any other H1-B or L1 or green-card worker.

[Tobmapsatonmi]

My understanding, perhaps incorrect, is that Canadian USPTO-registered agents only get "reciprocity" to work in Canada on Canadian applicants' applications.  If OP wants to work in the U.S. at an American firm on applications from everywhere, he's treated just like any other H1-B or L1 or green-card worker.

Ah, you're right.  I hadn't thought it through completely.

[MYK]

I could be completely misunderstanding it. After all, it's not really "reciprocity" in any conventional sense, as you've mentioned.

[Collin Hu]

So a foreign national would be able to practice patent law as an attorny in front of USTPO under the terms of limited-recognition? (I am Chinese by the way, but my nationality should be changed to Canadian by the time of my university graduation) I guess I am asking is that is citizenship a big barrier if I am going to a US law school?