Law School Discussion

Applying to Law School => Law School Admissions => Topic started by: rbutcher2178 on December 20, 2010, 12:30:53 PM

Title: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 20, 2010, 12:30:53 PM
From what I understand, the only GPA that is relevant to law school is the undergrad GPA. My LSAT score is terrible, as it turns out, it is really hard to write a PhD dissertation while craming for the LSAT right before the exam. :'(  I have applied to Suffolk, New England Law, Lewis & Clark, and Seattle U. I will be retaking the LSAT in February, and I have already submitted my applications with the terrible LSAT score with an explanation in the personal statement. I have a feeling I will be turned down by all of the schools above since they go off the undergrad GPA and LSAT score, unless they wait for the February score and it increases to < 150.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: louiebstef on December 20, 2010, 01:00:05 PM

Unfortunately, I pretty much agree with you.  Until you can at least post an LSAT over 150, that 142 along with the 2.7 GPA is going to kill you.  I recommend taking an LSAT prep course.  If you can boost your score into the middle 150s, you'd stand a much better chance of gaining admission. 
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 20, 2010, 03:24:17 PM
Am I reading this right, you have a phd and still want to go to lawschool? What was your PHD in and why can't you use that as a career?
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: JDGuy86 on December 20, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
yeah, even I'd strongly suggest going with the PhD career path it couldn't be that bad!
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 21, 2010, 05:09:52 AM
PhD is in inorganic chemistry, and I was involved in basic research, which is not marketable outside of academics. The outlook for chemists is actually slower than average for all occupations. Also, I graduated in May of 08, take a look at the events that took place in the stock market following May of 08. If the first five years of your career are the most important, I am screwed. Also, I cant get a postdoc since it has been 2.5 years since I graduated.

I am confident I can get < 150 next time around, this time around I will actually prepare for the LSAT.

A previous graduate from my lab now works as a patent attorney and is doing very well for himself. I was undecided if I wanted to go that path, although now that I am working a job that has little to do with my major, I think it is time to change directions. As a patent attorney, I will be able to get involved with important issues related to science and technology. According to the IP attorney I know, a PhD in chemistry with a JD are very marketable credentials to have. He mentioned that he gets headhunters calling him on a daily basis.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Hamilton on December 21, 2010, 05:48:26 AM
I suggest working with some career planning folks and using the organic chem degree.  I question the "marketability" of a Ph.D. and a JD as I was in a similar situation with a MS and 15+ years technical experience - zilch.  You have a Ph.D. in organic chem - you could actually benefit humanity applying that degree.

Piling up degrees is not the path to success.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 21, 2010, 06:52:17 AM
Nothing wrong with getting the JD, BUT you express an interest in IP, interesting thing is that lawschool does NOT repeat NOT allow you get licensed to practice in patent law, it just dosn't.

BUT, ironicly even a BA in a science field without a single day in lawschool DOES qualify you to take the patent bar, you'd just have to call yourself a "Patent Agent" without the JD. Those called "Patent Attorneys" have both degrees but do the exact same job for their clients. I'd start with the degree you have and be an agent in IP, if you like it then you could stop right there. If you did that and then wanted to other areas of law you can always get the JD latter too. Have you considered being a patent agent during the week and a part time lawstudent on weekends?
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 21, 2010, 06:59:58 AM
Thank you for the comments, now I know what others think regarding my situation.

Hamilton, if I understand you correctly, you have a MS in organic chem and a JD and are unable to find a job as a IP attorney? I would argue that now is not the best time to be looking for a career. Wait until the baby-boomers start retiring, which is already starting to happen. Now would be a great time for me to start a four year program, since in four years the economy should be back to where it was pre-Leman Brothers collapse.

Mandamus, that is actually a great idea. Any suggestions for passing the bar without going to law school? Perhaps I could start at a law firm as a patent agent and attend evening classes to become a attorney. I dont know of any law schools that have weekend classes?
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 21, 2010, 08:17:02 AM
You could do that, just don't call it a "law" firm unless you have at least one guy with a JD in there "Agent" (its a silly name game but they like to enforce it) as for prepping for it, they offer prep courses I believe Kaplan and  Barbri have some but if not others do for sure.

As for weekend classes, you can go as slow as one day a week(saturday or sunday) and be done in 5 years(or faster if you wish) at  http://www.cooley.edu/academics/    People will talkshit but you'd be doing a lawyers job each day while attending.

If you have enough Accounting electives you could sit the CPA exam too before getting the full JD which would let you do some(albeit not everything) in taxcourt also.

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Al5TBNmEq4Q94Z47uSHR2RmbvZx4?p=patent+bar+prep&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-701-1

Here is a list of patent bar preps that may help also. Let me know if it does.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: john4040 on December 21, 2010, 11:03:50 AM
In my opinion, Mandamus is spot on (except for the suggestion that you go get a CPA - I think that's taking things a bit too far in a direction that you probably don't want to go). 

(1) Become a patent agent and see if you like patent prosecution before going to law school.  This is an incredibly rare opportunity: You will be allowed to experience much of the same work you will be doing in a law firm - except, you won't have to shell out $150,000 in tuition / expenses to "test the waters."

(2) DO NOT call your firm a "law firm."  In the United States, the general rule is that lawyers are prohibited from entering into business with non-lawyers for the purposes of practicing law or from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers. The rationale given for the prohibition is that it will interfere with the independence of the lawyer’s professional judgment.

Currently, the only exception to that general rule in the U.S. is the District of Columbia where non-lawyers are permitted to be partners in law firms.

So, until you pass that bar exam (unless you're practicing in D.C.), I would put this idea on the backburner.

By the way, for your sake, I hope you meant > 150 :
I am confident I can get < 150 next time around, this time around I will actually prepare for the LSAT.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 21, 2010, 01:11:28 PM
I appreciate the advice. I have entertained the idea of becoming a patent agent, although until now I haven't given it some serious thought. Ideally, I would like to pass the patent bar and get some practical experience to test the waters. Can anyone recommend a good text to study in preparation for the bar for someone without a JD?

I meant > 150, although I am confident I can get < 150 too,  :P
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: john4040 on December 21, 2010, 01:39:02 PM
Can anyone recommend a good text to study in preparation for the bar for someone without a JD?

Dunno, man.  That question is out of my league.  I'm sure someone else can chime in.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 21, 2010, 02:50:25 PM
Did you check out the link I posted? It is just of yahoo searching "Patent bar prep" but there are a ton including Kaplan and Barbri which is the same company that most lawstudents use to prep for the regular bar and lsat.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 22, 2010, 04:44:40 AM
Yes, I checked out the link, thank you. I assume that most law students use either Kaplan or Barbri; I am curious if there was a bar prep that was preferred by the majority of law students. Some prep courses seemed like smoke and mirrors, and I would rather not shell out 500-3000 for a bogus course. Taking the bar without going to law school will be a challenge; I want all the resources I can get.

BTW, can anyone else search this site, evertime I try to search anything in any forum I get the error message
"You are not allowed to search for posts in this forum."
I am using IE7
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 22, 2010, 08:19:18 AM
It won't let me search either.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 22, 2010, 09:25:13 PM
what do you mean "dont bother with" that would make them guilty of the unauthorised practice of law, a criminal offense. Being a licensed attorney does not qualify you to do IP work without the patent bar also.

Other than that, good advise.

Quote
Yes, I checked out the link, thank you. I assume that most law students use either Kaplan or Barbri; I am curious if there was a bar prep that was preferred by the majority of law students. Some prep courses seemed like smoke and mirrors, and I would rather not shell out 500-3000 for a bogus course. Taking the bar without going to law school will be a challenge; I want all the resources I can get.

Patent bar prep should not cost anywhere near $3,000.  Most folks merely order self-study books and knock it out.  It's nothing like most regular bar exams and even many IP litigators never bother with the patent bar or take it during 1L summer while in law school and do just fine.

If you are willing to wait and retake the LSAT and work as a patent agent for a while, have you considered applying to the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) in DC?  You would be well qualified and would be paid to train as a patent examiner.  If you enjoy it, you can apply to school part time in the DC area, get tuition reimbursement and have a nice patent law related entry on your resume.  (Many PTO examiners go this route.)  They are always looking for people and you can apply online if you're serious about it.  The money is okay too, though it may take a bit to get going depending on the GS-level at which you enter.  A PhD should give you a bump even at entry-level.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: john4040 on December 23, 2010, 02:56:54 AM
what do you mean "dont bother with" that would make them guilty of the unauthorised practice of law, a criminal offense. Being a licensed attorney does not qualify you to do IP work without the patent bar also.

No, you're confused.
IP litigation does NOT require you to pass the patent bar.  IP prosecution does.
There are many subsets of IP: trademark, patent, copyright, trade secret, etc.  None of them require you to take the patent bar to litigate.  Patent litigation entails enforcement of a patent.  Patent litigation can take place in any federal court, and anyone who is admitted to practice in any state may litigate patent matters.  Prosecution generally entails the creation and maintenance of a patent before the USPTO.  Practicing before the USPTO requires passage of the patent bar.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 23, 2010, 07:53:10 AM
Then every IP coursebook in every JD program in the nation lies, or you misunderstand, which do you find more plausable?

what do you mean "dont bother with" that would make them guilty of the unauthorised practice of law, a criminal offense. Being a licensed attorney does not qualify you to do IP work without the patent bar also.

No, you're confused.
IP litigation does NOT require you to pass the patent bar.  IP prosecution does.
There are many subsets of IP: trademark, patent, copyright, trade secret, etc.  None of them require you to take the patent bar to litigate.  Patent litigation entails enforcement of a patent.  Patent litigation can take place in any federal court, and anyone who is admitted to practice in any state may litigate patent matters.  Prosecution generally entails the creation and maintenance of a patent before the USPTO.  Practicing before the USPTO requires passage of the patent bar.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: louiebstef on December 23, 2010, 08:02:39 AM
Tossy,

<applause>
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 23, 2010, 08:40:24 AM
undergrad stuck in a loop, what a suprise.

"but your honor I don't have to obey the law, because the opposing party spelled something wrong"

Let me know really break this down for you, read actual caselaw. Nearly every judge who writes it spells stuff wrong and starts sentences with And or Because and spells Majuana with an H, and uses words like niggardly(blows your mind but its considered ok apparently) So keep crying about your daddies but real life isn't found at the bottom of your bottle.

Enjoy disbarment.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Hamilton on December 23, 2010, 11:02:31 AM
Whats wrong with the word "niggardly?"  It's nowhere near the dreaded "N word" in meaning or application - just looks that way.

... and uses words like niggardly(blows your mind but its considered ok apparently)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: marcus-aurelius on December 23, 2010, 01:33:27 PM
Quote
Then every IP coursebook in every JD program in the nation lies, or you misunderstand, which do you find more plausable?

The most plausible explanation is that you have poor reading comprehension.

Bravo Tossy.  Some people are just ignorant.  You hit it right on.  People with bad grammar, (you know who you are) usually cannot comprehend
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: rbutcher2178 on December 24, 2010, 05:41:08 AM
Excellent advice Tossy. Application is in as a patent examiner. I actually work for the Government now, I am a GS-9. I noticed there was a job with the USPTO as a GS-15 after only 5 years experience, which is the top of the GS pay scale - amazing.

I was reluctant to move to DC, although now it seems like the smartest choice.

I noticed there a plethora of law schools to pick from in the DC area, any you suggest? I am retaking the LSAT in Feb. Lets assume I have a 160 LSAT and 2.7 Undergrad GPA with a PhD. I'm not really concerned about which law school I go to, as long as it is ABA accredited.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: john4040 on December 24, 2010, 06:18:40 AM
Excellent advice Tossy. Application is in as a patent examiner. I actually work for the Government now, I am a GS-9. I noticed there was a job with the USPTO as a GS-15 after only 5 years experience, which is the top of the GS pay scale - amazing.

I was reluctant to move to DC, although now it seems like the smartest choice.

I noticed there a plethora of law schools to pick from in the DC area, any you suggest? I am retaking the LSAT in Feb. Lets assume I have a 160 LSAT and 2.7 Undergrad GPA with a PhD. I'm not really concerned about which law school I go to, as long as it is ABA accredited.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Spend a great deal of time studying for the LSAT and go to George Washington.  It's one of the best schools for IP.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: MAJ. Lee, Awsome. on December 24, 2010, 07:35:55 AM
I'm pretty sure if you use the word niggardly in from jesse jackson or al sharpton, it'll be the only thing on the news for a month.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Hamilton on December 24, 2010, 08:40:55 PM
Yes, but why?  simply b/c it "sounds" like the dreaded "n-word?"  Ignorance does not make something right.

I'm pretty sure if you use the word niggardly in from jesse jackson or al sharpton, it'll be the only thing on the news for a month.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: MAJ. Lee, Awsome. on December 25, 2010, 09:09:31 AM
Majors have stepped down from public office after public outcry for using it, so factor that in.
Basicly, write those two men with that word and your name and lawschool and see how it spells out.

People lose their mind over "those people" too after all. (and that makes even less real sense dosn't it)

Yes, but why?  simply b/c it "sounds" like the dreaded "n-word?"  Ignorance does not make something right.

I'm pretty sure if you use the word niggardly in from jesse jackson or al sharpton, it'll be the only thing on the news for a month.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: louiebstef on December 25, 2010, 11:30:22 AM
That simply shows both how poor the public's vocabulary is (Maury:  "You ARE the father!), and what politically correct mutants most have become.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
nig·gard·ly
   /ˈnɪgərdli/ Show Spelled[nig-erd-lee] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
reluctant to give or spend; stingy; miserly.
2.
meanly or ungenerously small or scanty: a niggardly tip to a waiter.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I cannot believe you would threaten Hamilton with a PC attack.  Weak.  Very weak.  Please don't cry racism when none
exists in the situation.  We have enough turmoil in this world.

By the way, if anything, he may have been BAITING for a knee-jerk PC reaction.  Did you ever think of that?
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Hamilton on December 25, 2010, 09:02:40 PM
Again... WHY?  Simply because it SOUNDS like the dreaded N-word and people have such a poor grasp on vocabulary?  That is pretty sad now isn't it?

Majors have stepped down from public office after public outcry for using it, so factor that in.
Basicly, write those two men with that word and your name and lawschool and see how it spells out.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: MAJ. Lee, Awsome. on December 26, 2010, 02:01:17 PM
So you are probally ok with words like "renigging" "Indian-giver" and
"jimmyrigged"(spin off of "n-word-rigged" with reference to the now infamous jimcrow laws)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: john4040 on December 26, 2010, 02:03:36 PM
So you are probally ok with words like "renigging" "Indian-giver" and
"jimmyrigged"(spin off of "n-word-rigged" with reference to the now infamous jimcrow laws)

Or... you're just some PC pu$$y that thinks the world revolves around you and your race.  Get over yourself and EDUCATE yourself instead of playing the victim, man:

The word "niggardly" is NOT racist. (In the United States, there have been several controversies concerning the word "niggardly," an adjective meaning "stingy" or "miserly," due to its phonetic similarity to the racial slur "n-word." However, the two words are etymologically unrelated.  "Niggard" predates the word "n-word" in the English language by a couple hundred years at least. "Niggard" comes up as early as Chaucer, late 14th century. The racial slur "n-word," on the other hand, doesn't enter the lexicon until the 1500's, first as "neger" or "neeger," obviously from the same root as the French negre and Spanish negro, words for the color black, which are derived from the Latin niger.)

Also, it's "reneging", not "renigging." (The word comes from Medieval Latin and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the word that you suggest it does).

By the way, thanks for threadcrapping  Next time, start your own thread in the appropriate forum.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: marcus-aurelius on December 26, 2010, 02:40:11 PM
So you are probally ok with words like "renigging" "Indian-giver" and
"jimmyrigged"(spin off of "n-word-rigged" with reference to the now infamous jimcrow laws)
*probably.  I have no problem with debating a word and grammar.  But if we are planning on it, we should use it correctly
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 26, 2010, 05:07:02 PM
Niger  ::)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Morten Lund on December 26, 2010, 09:09:25 PM
I'm a little late to the game here, obviously, but I figured I would add a dose of reality to the "IP law" discussion.

"IP law" is not a clearly defined separate practice.  Virtually all business matters entail some IP issues, if only a licensing provision or patent indemnity.  If touching those provisions required membership in the patent bar, I would be in trouble (as would approximately 98% of business attorneys in the US). 

Similarly, "IP ligitation" is a fuzzy concept, as many business disputes will involve IP issues - such as litigating those provisions I described above.  If participation in litigation of those subject matters required admission to the patent bar, then approximately 98% of US litigators would be in the same pile of trouble as I.

In fact, the patent bar only relates to ... patents - which are only a relatively small subset of "intellectual property."  Copyright, know-how, trade secrets - all are intellectual property governed by "IP law," and none involve patents or the patent bar.  (Trademarks are an interesting middle ground).

And even within that patent subset, there is much activity that (as far as most attorneys are concerned, anyway) does not require admission to the patent bar.  As far as I know, admission to the patent bar is only required for a proceeding before the Patent Office (and to hold yourself out as a "patent attorney"), which limits the requirement for that bar admission by quite a bit.

Of course, I could be wrong.  I have done no research on the subject (other than check Wikipedia for the full name of the USPTO), and am basing my views entirely on observations of the behavior of every lawyer I know.  So it is possible that all of BigLaw is one giant violation, and is practicing IP law without proper authorization - who knows.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: Morten Lund on December 26, 2010, 09:19:12 PM
But, to the OP - it sounds like patent agent may be a useful step for you, for a couple of reasons.

Patent lawyers are indeed in high demand generally ... but mostly within BigLaw.  Firms on the less expensive end of the spectrum provide mostly straight-forward patent services, and face stiff competition from patent agents on price.  As a result "patent attorney" is not as attractive a designation at that level, and patent agent may get you the same result for a whole lot less pain.

Big firms do seek patent lawyers, and typically pay a salary premium to associates admitted to the patent bar, but - and this is a big but - they only hire patent attorneys who also meet their general hiring guidelines.  Very few big firms will consider a candidate from the schools you mention, which will make it a challenge for you to get a job with BigLaw under the best of circumstances, and we are not living in the best of circumstances.

In short, I tend to agree that law school may not be in your best interest at this time, for all the reasons others have posted as well.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 26, 2010, 09:34:52 PM
It dosn't matter how long you been riding coat tails, you can't "waive" the bar(patent or otherwise)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 26, 2010, 09:37:00 PM
As to the "most lawyers" comment, MOST practicing lawyers ARE walking 8.3's. If you don't understand that, don't bother trying to understand the rest.
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: interrex on December 26, 2010, 10:10:52 PM
like I said...........(reference last posting that you didnt quote)

Quote
you can't "waive" the bar(patent or otherwise)

Maybe you can't "waive" the bar, but some folks can certainly "waive-in" to the patent bar without taking the patent bar exam.  Worrisome?  Perhaps.  Since we are such good friends now, my dear mandamus, I will call the PTO and all the law firms I know in the morning and tell them about your concerns.  I'm certain once everyone hears about their malpractice, this kind of thing will stop.  I can add some more people to the list if cptawsome would like to weigh in as well.  What luck to stumble upon two such wonderful advice-givers on the same small thread.  It's been a Merry Christmas indeed!  (Or holiday of your choice--I don't want to be exclusionist!)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: nealric on December 28, 2010, 01:42:51 PM
Quote
undergrad stuck in a loop, what a suprise.

"but your honor I don't have to obey the law, because the opposing party spelled something wrong"

Let me know really break this down for you, read actual caselaw. Nearly every judge who writes it spells stuff wrong and starts sentences with And or Because and spells Majuana with an H, and uses words like niggardly(blows your mind but its considered ok apparently) So keep crying about your daddies but real life isn't found at the bottom of your bottle.

Enjoy disbarment.

Well, it seems you have ignored my warning ban and continue to disrespect other posters. This ban is permanent.
(http://www.aizuddindanian.com/voi/images/banhammer.jpg)
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: darylej on March 06, 2011, 11:07:19 PM

Perhaps I could start at a law firm as a patent agent and attend evening classes to become a attorney.


so is it that easy to just "start a firm" ? I assume this is straight out of school and just passed the pat bar . I mean can one actually do this and expect to find work as a private practice ?
Title: Re: 2.7 undergrad GPA 3.4 MS and 3.7 PhD LSAT 142
Post by: darylej on March 07, 2011, 05:35:12 PM
Ignore last post - I see now the quote was "start AT a law firm" not "start a firm"