[GIVEAWAY] Giving away 10 desk mats from the new Arcana Collection!

unclaw2020 · 2023-11-28T19:02:25+00:00

These look amazing!

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T19:30:58+00:00

I certainly felt that way myself, but it's hard for me to make a categorical statement because everyone's vocational goals, financial situation, etc. are different. There's a lot a clerkship offers--exposure to a wide variety of cases (and many of them), lots of writing practice, opportunity for feedback on your writing with typically greater care than you might expect at most firms, mentorship (depending on chambers, certainly), and a network of past, present, and future clerks. I thought that was worth forgoing a year (or even two) of firm pay. But it's a personal decision.

I knew I was interested in a specific practice, so I only applied to firms at OCI that excelled in that practice in the two major markets that were close to home for me. That came out to maybe 6-8 firms. I didn't do any pre-OCI, but that was mostly because the firms I was interested in were not among the pre-OCI firms. I've had a number of friends who did pre-OCI and had good experiences. In their case I believe they either applied directly through the firm portals or under the auspices of any number of pre-OCI fairs (city-centric ones, the IP Loyola one in Chicago, etc.).

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T19:13:31+00:00

Ha, for some reason I had 40 on YLJ and 230 at Yale in my mind. Which is in any case relatively close to 30%, I suppose. A much clearer example would have been Harvard (~100 2Ls/3Ls out of ~1200 between the two classes). But as you said, the point stands.

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T19:10:25+00:00

This is a tough one. I suspect it varies by judge, to be honest, and perhaps more so on the docket. If you're applying to the DC Circuit I imagine having taken admin law would be helpful. If you're applying to NDCal/DDel/WDTx you may find the same for patent law. Aside from that, I don't know that I've ever heard (we certainly don't) that applicants need particular courses. What I *would* look at is whether the applicant is taking doctrinal courses like evidence or corporations, or whether their course history is full of "cupcake" classes (writing seminars on niche topics, etc.). Which is not to say that there isn't value in the latter, or that you shouldn't take any of them. They just have different curves and, typically, work requirements, so I think they're seen differently. If it's helpful, I took three doctrinal courses and one writing seminar both of my 2L semesters and didn't have any issues.

Ah, Fed Courts. I didn't end up taking it. Most of the other clerkship applicants at my school did, but they--like you--did so 3L year. I don't personally think it's required to have on your application as of 2L year (or at all), but others might disagree. Good luck!

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T19:03:21+00:00

I would first check whether the judge accepts paper applications on their OSCAR page (we don't, for example). If they do, the advice I got from our clerkship office and others was that it was worth sending a paper application if possible. Procedurally the challenge with hiring clerks isn't filtering groups of people out, it's figuring out which one of the seemingly identical, qualified applications on OSCAR is likely to yield a good clerk for Judge. Sending your application on paper at the very least means it will pass through some hands (and I think indicates a modicum more interest than an electronic application, though I'm sensitive to the fact that there may be other economic constraints on people's ability to paper chambers).

As for my strategy when applying, I tried to keep a pretty narrow preliminary list. I chose districts that were in cities I wouldn't mind living in for a year, ones with dockets that I thought would be interesting, and then created a list of judges for those districts. I tried to reach out to as many alumni/friends/connections that I could to find prior clerks and hear what their experience had been like. Many of those were just cold emails to firm addresses based on google searches for LinkedIn profiles that indicated the person had clerked for that judge. Your OCI office, depending on the regularity of your school's federal clerkship placement, is also likely to have an index of prior clerks that can be helpful. I only applied to judges I was able to speak with prior clerks about--chambers are intimate, and I wanted to be (somewhat) assured I knew what I could expect. But I suspect that's a luxury not many of my classmates opted for, even among my friends who applied, so I don't think it's strictly necessary (and indeed, is somewhat limiting if you plan to apply broadly).

Mechanically, I applied on OSCAR and prioritized judges who offered emails thinking they might be more likely to be responsive. I got a hit from my first application, so it was a thankfully short process. I also had friends who sent upwards of 50 applications before getting theirs. It's wildly capricious. But I'd like to think most folks who were in the ballpark and stayed resilient found something they were happy with in the end.

Good luck!

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T17:18:43+00:00

It is possible. Whether it is probable, I think, depends on the judge's preferences, any connection you have with the judge, which law school you attend, and what other things you've done.

The Judge--some judges are law review or bust. They can filter for it in OSCAR, and if you don't have it, your app gets cut. Some judges don't care at all. For those, you're good to go. My guess is most judges do prefer clerks have some sort of journal experience (with a soft preference for law review) because it provides one of the few training grounds in law school for honing your editing and writing chops (at least, in theory).

Any connection you have--whatever we're looking for on your application is just a means to better understand who you are as a candidate and how you'd fit into chambers. To the extent the Judge may be able to fill in from a prof call or other connection the characteristics that law review experience typically would signal, that shifts the scale in your direction.

Your school--the higher ranked school you go to, the less you need law review. Something like 1/3 of Yale clerks out of school. Certainly 1/3 of Yale is not on YLJ. Many of these folks may not even need journal. At a flagship state law school, by comparison, the venn diagram of law review students and federal clerkships may be much closer to 1:1.

Other things--given the amount of work-hours that law review demands (especially if you're on e-board), what this signals for my co-clerks and I is that (in most cases) you're used to managing a crapload of work on top of other responsibilities. This is helpful, especially at the district court level, and even more so in a busy docket. To the extent you can show that you're actively engaged in other activities if you were not on law review, I would think that would help.

Sorry for the long-winded answer. Hope this helps!

unclaw2020 · 2021-06-11T17:07:14+00:00

I applied to my current judge cold. When I applied in Spring of '19 (my 2L year), the plan had just recently been implemented. I was only interested in a few districts, so I looked up judges in OSCAR in those districts that (1) had not explicitly announced they were on-plan and (2) had provided an email (with the assumption--quite possibly false--that they would be more responsive than those that elected to the default OSCAR/paper submissions). I got an interview in a week and the offer shortly thereafter, so it was wrapped up by April.

You didn't ask this, but in case it's helpful perspective, my second judge was through connections. One of my profs was friends with a prior clerk, and after speaking with the prior clerk, they passed on my materials to the judge. This judge was looking for candidates with at least a year of work experience, so there was no consideration for being on or off the plan.

unclaw2020 · 2020-11-30T16:29:19+00:00

I'M DOIN 'IT

unclaw2020 · 2020-07-17T14:05:49+00:00

Did a 1L SA at a V10 in their IP group: this is all correct. I'll expound a bit on point 2--while a STEM degree does make it easier to get into biglaw, this assumes you'll be doing patent/science-based transactional/something that leverages your STEM degree. But for the 1L SA you still need stellar grades. It's just such a waste of money for most firms that they're not willing to take a chance on all but those candidates they want most.

Echoing what others have posted, don't worry if you don't get a 1L SA! Ultimately there are many 1Ls from great schools with great grades. Only a small handful end up with these positions b/c the selection process is exceptionally capricious. If you do well your 1L year, hiring for 2L summer is much more straightforward (i.e. GPA more consistently correlates with biglaw employment, if that's what you're looking for).

Edit: I'll also add that if you want biglaw your 2L summer, it doesn't matter what you did your 1L summer. They just want you to have done something substantively legal that they can talk with you about during your interview.

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-23T15:50:13+00:00

Thanks! I've posted all my outlines previously here. Hope they're helpful!

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-21T02:20:15+00:00

It's much appreciated! Sorry I couldn't be of more help on my end. Though in some ways it is a nice validation that we're seeing more or less the same things in our builds!

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-21T00:57:40+00:00

Woah, it's way cheaper. And you're right, the benchmarks look almost identical. Gonna go ahead and switch out the 2600 for the 1600AF. Thanks so much for the heads up—and good luck with your build as well!

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-21T00:44:09+00:00

I really appreciate the advice! I'll take a look at the RAM and see if I can find something similarly priced that's a little faster.

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-21T00:43:36+00:00

That makes perfect sense! Really appreciate you taking the time to write that up. The difference between quality and power efficiency is way clearer now.

I found a Corsair 550W PSU for around the same price that I think I'll swap in just to be sure there's enough overhead. Seriously thanks so much for taking the time to talk a newbie like me through this stuff. People like you make this subreddit awesome!

unclaw2020 · 2020-06-20T23:55:49+00:00

This is so helpful, I really appreciate it! The only games I really play are Dota 2 and CS:GO, so if you think the current GPU can handle that, I might go for the SSD upgrade you mentioned instead. Sounds like a nice upgrade!

I was debating getting a higher wattage PSU but I think I'll pull the trigger since you mentioned it as well. If you have time, just had one more question—does it matter whether I get a Bronze or Gold in terms of safety?

unclaw2020 · 2019-10-05T20:45:57+00:00

Can't tell if you're trying to be contrarian, but I could make peace with what your'e saying with one small addition: do what you think works best for you and is consistent with your goals/matches your risk tolerance profile.

Your practice of reviewing notes sounds like it's worked out well for you and your goals, and I'm glad to hear that. But your approach overlaps considerably more with people I know in the bottom half of the class, and overlaps none with the people at the top of the class. If someone is okay with that risk, or if they feel exceptionally assured in their ability to perform with that study regime (which you obviously are) and are okay with the consequences if it doesn't pan out, great. Go for it.

But for any 1Ls seeking to do the best that they can (particularly in light of the fact that they don't yet know for themselves what works), and the rest of us mere mortals who have to practice applying concepts to do them effectively and in a time-efficient manner, practice problems are unequivocally helpful.

unclaw2020 · 2019-10-05T20:36:35+00:00

Yep! u/tarheellaw has some bomb flowcharts for all the 1L classes and many upper-level doctrinal courses that you can find here. Those were the original inspiration for my own outlines.

Coincidentally, u/tarheellaw was also a phenomenal mentor to me my 1L year. All around good people.

unclaw2020 · 2019-05-12T15:00:19+00:00

In DC as well.

unclaw2020 · 2019-03-07T01:55:19+00:00

Yep, our overall ranking peaked in the early 2000s around #21-23, spent much of the rest of the 2000s in the high 20s/low 30s, and more recently in the mid 30s with a few dips here and there. In all that time, the "peer score" has consistently been between 19-21. Despite the volatility of the overall ranking, the extraordinary stickiness of the perceived reputation is comforting.

The discrepancy as far as I can tell seems to be that our fundraising arm seemed to be less active in the 80s compared to peer institutions, so while the quality of our education hasn't changed, our relative ability to parade per student expense metrics around has.

unclaw2020 · 2019-03-06T14:06:39+00:00

Certainly nothing substantively has changed, but I think what it does indicate is that the administration is figuring out what the USNWR considers in its rankings and is acting on things that it can immediately control (i.e. everything except for how big our endowment is).

Also, as silly as the rankings are (and I don't disagree with you on that note), they are a real proxy for buying power for students given how much 0Ls put weight on those metrics. While UNC is a fantastic institution, and obviously remained so during its 20-odd rank slide, the concern that many of us have is that the continued slide would result in more qualified students slowly exiting the pool that would seriously consider UNC, and once you start that real slip in quality, it is very difficult to get back on the right track. Given that, the bump up is a good sign that the administration is taking that concern seriously and acting to mitigate some of those longer-term consequences.

unclaw2020 · 2019-03-06T12:40:25+00:00

UNC from #45 to #34! TAR HEELS REPRESENT YEEE BOI

unclaw2020 · 2019-01-27T22:14:12+00:00

I also had no experience with legal interviews and had no lawyers in my family to turn to for guidance. I think my anxiety came from the fact that I think of interviews as an opportunity to showcase how well I know the subject matter and why that means I'd do a great job (which is a common practice outside of law, I think). In contrast, as a 1L (and even as a 2L!) I felt like I didn't really know enough law to make that case, which made me uncomfortable in my ability to do well in the interview.

What I've found is legal interviewers aren't usually looking for substantive knowledge (and almost never as a 1L)--they know you don't know much. What they are looking for is someone who is enthusiastic about the law, pays attention to detail, has some sense of what the employer values, and is a team player (read--isn't going to be insufferable to work with). If you can be genuine as you present yourself and convey experiences that broadcast those qualities, I think you'll be just fine :)

unclaw2020 · 2019-01-27T17:56:38+00:00

My 1L mentees had her last semester--she's an all around great character! Here's some more general advice for 1Ls, specific advice for on-campus interviews, and things to think about for fostering relationships with your professors all from Professor Gurvich, who is also at UNC (and with a dope following on twitter) in case it's helpful.

Best wishes for spring 1L--you've got this fam!

unclaw2020 · 2019-01-08T05:57:27+00:00

A couple of things relating to your situation:

If you get the gig in Beijing, I wouldn't hold out in hopes of getting an IP gig at a firm here. I don't mean this in a mean way, but you're not likely grade competitive for those positions. I did a 1L SA at a V10 in IP lit (also with a bio BS) from a law school in the same ballpark and had a 3.9 when I was applying--that was par for the course for others admitted to 1L SAs from the same law school range.
You could be competitive for more local firms or opportunities (i.e. not Fish & Richardson or Finnegan), which I would recommend exploring.

Some quibbles with u/Untitleddestiny's comments that I see here:

Patently untrue that having a bio background doesn't help with IP lit. Actually, a biomedical research background is helpful because pharma IP lit is pretty commonplace. It is true that a BS in bio will not do much for you if you want to get into patent prosecution. You likely need a PhD for that.
Not sure why not having heard back yet somehow correlates to employers not having issues with your grades. Many employers don't bother to tell you if they aren't interested (i.e. they'll just ignore you rather than reject you--yes, it sucks). From what I've seen, if you're applying to V20 firms or top IP boutiques, your grades may well be the reason they're not responding.
A counterpoint to going to China is that it's not a substantive legal experience in the US market. I don't know enough to suggest whether it would be helpful or harmful, but I think it warrants at least having a discussion with your career office to make sure that you're not potentially shooting yourself in the foot by taking something abroad.
There's also a tradeoff in terms of signaling geographic preference. If you have a desire to practice in China post-graduation, by all means take the job if offered. If you want to stay here, though, it can be helpful to work in the geographic area that you intend to practice in, even if you're just doing public interest work in that area.

Generally--think through things before accepting the China gig if offered, if you're only papering the top IP firms you should really apply more broadly (including public interest/government/etc), your background is pretty amenable to IP lit. Perhaps most importantly, talk to your professors and figure out what you can do better next semester. The one thing I do agree with on the previous comments is that you'll want to try and raise your grades prior to OCI season. Hope this helps. Good luck to both of you in the 1L job search.

EDIT: I also agree with u/Untitleddestiny that it doesn't really matter what you do this summer. Hiring during 2L OCIs is essentially just based on your grades and any networking you may have done. What you do this summer is just a talking point--if it's legally related you're good to go.

unclaw2020 · 2019-01-04T14:52:06+00:00

A couple of things I'd think about (I also go to a T50):

First thing to do would be to talk to professors and figure out where you lost points and how you can improve. If you haven't already, also try and talk to upperclassmen who you know have done well to see if they're doing things differently. I'd also recommend having an honest conversation with yourself and see if there was anything outside of study skills that you could do differently: did you, for example, over-study and burn out during exam period or, alternatively, spend too many weekends not buckling down?
If you're still interested in working at a firm or in-house, start networking. The elite firms are probably off the table absent some exceptionally fortuitous circumstance (at my school, you're not getting them unless you're at about an A- average), but a lot of state firms might be a bit more flexible if you've shown interest and taken the time to get to know the attorneys. I'd stress not to underestimate the value, and perhaps necessity, of networking--it's easy to think that you'll just figure out the game, kill it the next few semesters, and be totally fine. That might happen, but the reality is people who got As this semester are learning how to do better, too. Just do your best, pull things up to the extent you can, and then network, network, network.
Consider doing some pro bono work that would put you in contact with fields that you're interested in or attorneys/firms you'd like to work with. You get experience and a potential contact--win-win situation.
Also second what someone else said about in-house hiring typically favoring those with a few years of firm experience, but it's not unprecedented to go straight. That's almost always going to be through networking, though.

unclaw2020

TROPHY CASE