cppdev

Hi all,

I will soon have an MS in CE from a good university (got my BS in EECS), and I'm very interested in getting into patent law. However, for a number of reasons (weak job market, benefit of work experience, and the fact that I don't have much time to study for and take the LSAT for this years admissions cycle) I'm looking into spending a year or two as a patent agent before going to law school.

Do you think this approach is wise? Obviously I'll have to pass the patent bar first, which I plan to do during the coming school year. Is the job market for patent agents any better or worse than that of patent attorneys? I have done several internships in some well-known tech companies, but don't have any real patent experience.

Should I instead apply for law schools? Or even go into the computer industry for a few years? Thanks for the advice.

dadofsam

As discussed earlier in this thread, you might want to start in the profession by seeing if you can get a position as a technical advisor or patent engineer at a law firm, or perhaps at a company, or as a patent examiner in the USPTO. That will get you some experience in the field while you are becoming a patent engineer. Are you in a location where such positions are available?

cppdev

Thanks for the reply. The area where I go to school currently doesn't have too many such jobs, but I am originally from the Bay Area (South Bay) and I plan on moving back there after I graduate. I'd expect there are positions available there.

Other than not having to take the patent bar (which will take a fair amount of time to study for), is there any benefit to being a technical advisor/patent engineer as opposed to a patent agent? I get the impression that it's very difficult to get into this field, since all the job postings I've seen ask for at least 1-3 years of patent experience (even for technical advisor positions), so I thought that having the patent bar in hand would help my chances. Given my lack of patent experience, is there anything I can do to make myself stand out?

dadofsam

cppdev:

In the current economy, everything is more difficult than usual. The number of entry-level positions has decreased while the number of those competing for them has increased. That includes technical advisor positions, not all of which are advertised.

When you are ready to look for work, you should blanket all patent firms in the area with a well-written cover letter and resume, as well as using any personal contacts to connect with such firms, and with major corporations having in-house patent personnel in your technical field.

Note that there is no guarantee that this will open any doors for you; it's just something you need to do to be thorough.

Being a patent agent when you apply for these jobs can put you a bit ahead of others, but remember that the technical advisor positions are expected to lead to those advisors becoming patent agents; for those most part technical advisors hit salary and status ceilings relatively quickly.

Hiking10k

My situation may be different from other people in this forum. I am just out of law school and looking for job. When I was in law school, I had chances to get training in a small law firm and the legal department of a big pharma. I have a strong technical background and have written lots of scientific reports. However, it seems that the firms prefer people who have experience, i.e., drafting a significant number of patent applications. They are very reluctant to take fresh graduates. Passing the patent bar does not seem to help much. While this is not surprising under the current economic downturn, the question is how to get over it. I know that I should raise the question and take action earlier. I sent solicitation letters to the law firms in Midwest but did not get any positive response. I want to try the firms in DC but don't know if there is any better. The future does not look pretty. I don't want to give up at this time. But I also need to be realistic and look for other opportunities. Any suggestions? Thanks a lot!

dadofsam

Hiking: I'm not sure what to tell you. Your statements don't give much of a clue as to your qualifications; they represent your own conclusions as to these, which might or might not match what a law firm or other prospective employer might think of them.

Having passed the patent bar and written technical papers are very positive qualifications. However, remember that this is a tough economy, entry-level positions are not as numerous as they used to be (for one thing, some clients of law firms have cut their IP budgets or even gone bankrupt) and there are more contenders for each position.

Did you attend a well-regarded law school? How were your grades? Are you competing for positions with people having more advanced degrees than you have? What technological field is your expertise in? (If you're in biotech, you need a Ph.D., at least, to be competitive for entry-level IP positions).

Yes, try the Washington, D.C. firms; perhaps even the USPTO.

Hiking10k

dadofsam, thanks a lot for the reply. I did not come up with the patent drafting requirement. Some recruiters and employers told me about that. Because it is hard for a fresh graduate to get such experience, I think what they really mean is that they want to hire people with experience. Although my school is not the 20 best, it is a first tier in the US News. My grade is not the best but certainly not the worst. But I have lots of experience in chemistry/pharmaceutical science. It is difficult to have a chance to draft a patent application in this area unless you are in a law firm (not even in-house). BTW, how do you consider volunteering time and service in a company or a law firm (not sure if it accepts graduates)? Will this help? If yes, how? Any way to boost my qualification to open more doors?

dadofsam

Hiking10k: Well, your field is chemistry and pharmaceutical sciences, you went to a good (but not top-rated) law school and your grades were OK but not outstanding. So you did not shine as a law student; on the other hand you have done a lot of scientific writing (though it’s not clear in what capacity). I assume that you have taken the bar exam in one or more states but have not yet heard whether or not you passed.

I can’t give you a lot of reasons to be optimistic. At this point in time the only way I can see for you to improve your qualifications is to take a more advanced technical degree, but that will take several years or more, so it would not improve your position at this time. So you need to make the most of your current qualifications, namely scientific experience. Remember, though that (as I have said) the competition is tough and is likely to have netter qualifications (on paper, anyway) than you (for the reasons mentioned above)

What you probably should do is expand the ways in which you look for a position. Sending solicitation letters to law firms is all right for a start but they probably did not get very far into the system.

I suggest you do the following (all of them) if you haven’t done so already:

1. Contact your law school alumni association to see whether any alumni are IP lawyers and are willing to help you, either with advice or with a contact for an actual position. As part of this, see if you can get to meet someone on the specific understanding that you are not looking for a job with his/her firm but are looking for solid advice as to how to get a job in the profession in general (that makes it possible for them to help you without feeling obligated).

2. Check the websites of IP firms in the geographical area(s) you wish to work in. See if any are seeking entry-level patent attorneys and apply through the websites.

3. Look on Craigslist for openings.

4. You might need to have your resume rewritten; it will cost you money but it could be worthwhile.

5. Consider seeking a position as an examiner in the USPTO.

6. There are some people on this site who are legal recruiters. I can think of Cartera and Sallyawp. Perhaps they can be of help.

7. Finally, keep at it. You need to be persistent, especially in this economy

dadofsam

Another idea with no guarantee that it would help. In addition to looking for firms, look for sole practitioners or very small firms (2-3 attorneys) who would be willing to give you some experience/training in order to use your (hopefully) proven scientific writing skills.

You also may need to expand you search area to other parts of the country in order to find that elusive entry-level position.

danord

I am a senior in high school (I know, shouldn't be thinking this far ahead...) and am trying to decide between undergrad in MechE or Computer Science, both with a goal of becoming a patent/IP lawyer. I am currently leaning towards CS, but only because I enjoy/understand my CS class more than my physics class.

My Questions:
1. In regard to the job outlook, do you have any input on attorneys with CS degrees versus ME degrees? For CS degrees, BA vs BS?

2. Is a patent attorney with a CS degree restricted to only reading through lines of code, or do they often deal with other sorts of IP?

Thanks

Hiking10k

dadofsam:
Really appreciate your time and thoughts. Thank a lot for your sober analysis and valuable input!

dadofsam

Danord: As you have said (and as I have said many times on this forum) you are thinking too far ahead. First concentrate on choosing colleges to apply to and picking a major that you will like AND DO WELL IN and try to get admitted to that program. The rest can wait a few years. You may find that you decide to change your career path entirely while in college.

cellardweller

Hiking10k:

beyond the two paths clearly outlined by dadodsam, I think there is a third way:

Start your own shop!

That may sound like a crazy scenario for somebody straight out of law school but I don't believe it is. In the current economy I personally think it is the best choice. Big law is not hiring and small boutique shops are also struggling.

It is the path I followed and it has worked beyond my wildest expectations. I graduated from law school two years ago and opened shop the day after my acceptance to the state bar. I took the patent bar six months later. I now have five to six long term clients and am ready to hire another partner because on the demand on the business. I don't advertise, don't even have web site but still business is flowing in. I don't bill by the hour and my commute is 20 feet from my bedroom to my home office.

This may sound too good to be true, like one of these late night infomercials! Now granted, I didn't follow the traditional path. Law is really a second career to me after 25 years as a technology entrepreneur. I graduated from MIT back in 1980 and have started and run a number of companies, none of which unfortunately hit the jackpot. After the market bust of 2000, where my latest venture had run out of cash, I was getting bored with nothing to do while waiting for the tech market to recover. I thought I would form a consulting company to work with small business. After dealing with the frustrations of trying to get my own inventions protected and patents filed, I felt there was a disconnect between what emerging technology companies needed and what IP firms offered. There was no concept of building IP as an asset that could be leveraged. Patent work was just a big black hole where money went in and little ever came out. I then thought about becoming a patent agent but quickly realized I would better off as an attorney. I could give all type of business advice not just write patents.

I had to have an angle and I found it: the patent field was going through major changes, established attorneys were confused by the new rules and major patent reform was on the horizon. Clients hated the bill by the hour model (I know I did) and they wanted quick results. I focused on a small niche which most established patent firms don't cover which is accelerated examinations. Established firms firms don't do these examinations because they don't know how and even if they do it their business model makes it difficult for them to pursue these opportunities: you needed to do tons of upfront research and you could not charge it all back to the client. I tested the concept with a few tech companies and their investors and the response was immediate: you mean you can get me an office action on the merits within 3 months as opposed to 3 years! A patent within one year as opposed to 5! Where do I sign?

I also approached universities for business as they all try to leverage their R&D but it didn't go far. They wanted docketing software, liability insurance and the competition was fierce. They also didn't care about accelerated examinations as much as small companies.

So now, I work with a few hand picked companies that need to build a patent portfolio in order to raise capital. The projects are at least a year in length and I charge the companies a flat monthly retainer. Companies don't see my cost as an expense but as an investment in IP. I can help them monetize their inventions. I work on nanotech, software, medical devices and anything I believe I can get my hands around. I "imbed" with the inventors until I know everything about their work. That will typically take months. My objective is to know as much about the technology as the key inventors before I write a single sentence in the application. Most inventors have no clue about the prior art so I have developed specialized search tools to help me survey the opportunity.

Since you have a strong technology background, and if you are willing to invest a ton of time to understand new technologies, i don't see why what I do could not work for you. Send me a PM, maybe we could work together!

dadofsam

Cellardweller: Congratulations on your innovative and imaginative way to start a practice. Best of luck as you continue expanding.

ncsu12

danord - I am currently finishing up my senior year in achieving a B.S. in Computer Science, and I have sent off my law school applications. Like you, I thought ahead. I knew that I wanted to be a patent attorney in the 8th grade. I chose Computer Science because it is a growing field for patent law, and the first time that I wrote a program was during my freshman year of college. If you feel like patent law is what you want to do, focus on that goal and work for it. I've done numerous extracurricular activities (ex. student government, judicial board, etc) which not only are beneficial for law school, but are also beneficial for internships.

I encourage you to go for the B.S. It may limit your schools, but trust me, you will be better off. I have friends who are getting a B.A. in CSC, and they regret it. You will learn more of a practical application, and that's incredibly useful.

The plus to CSC is that there are really awesome and well paying internships. Also, I have a couple contacts who used to sit in on admissions boards for law school, and having a major like CSC makes you stick out as a candidate (in a good way )

I hope this helps. Thinking ahead isn't a bad thing, and a plus is that you'll have a stable undergrad degree