New York Lawyer
August 27, 2002

Q:
Like a lot of recent top-tier law school graduates, I haven�t found employment yet. My background is in biotech, but it seems most firms with biotech practices are only interested in lateral hires.

I�m studying for the bar for multiple states and, given my biotech background, I also am going to sit for the patent bar. I�ve been accepted into an LLM program specializing in IP at a top-15 law school.

Will an LLM in IP be worth the extra expense of another year at school, or should I continue my job search after the bar exams?

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:

I bet different people would give you different answers on this one.

First off, some people, me for instance, would be surprised that your biotech background so far is not proving appealing to firms, even without extensive practice experience. All areas of intellectual property practice -- trademark, patent, regulatory, compliance, corporate identity, trade secrets, etc. -- seem to be expanding practice areas. I�d keep trying the firms; surely someone appreciates the importance of recruiting and grooming future IP talent. A strong scientific and chemistry grounding can really enhance one�s legal effectiveness.

Moreover, if you pass the patent bar, I�d think you would be very marketable. Both in specialty boutiques and in the specialized legal departments of large corporations, the patent function is going full steam. If an in-house role interests you, I�d certainly talk to the pharmaceutical and specialty chemical companies.

The debate on the desirability of an LLM rages on. Some would argue that lawyers are technicians, and that supplemental masters level training does not enhance their productivity or impressiveness to clients all that much. Other argue that people should "find their focus" in legal practice and then go back to get an LLM to further enhance their skills in that area. Still others would say that getting the LLM early on enhances your marketability by suggesting strong motivation and a strong pre-existing career focus -- both very good things.

I once was asked by a client to conduct an informal survey of whether an LLM in tax at NYU would materially enhance his attractiveness and partnership potential. The survey answers from senior and hiring partners were all over the place. Some said, "Absolutely a good thing. Shows good career focus and expands your skill set." Others said, "It doesn�t hurt, but just getting into NYU�s superior program probably means as much as whatever you learn there." Still others said, "It wouldn�t mean all that much to us -- and might even be a bit of a turn-off. We want to specialize people in the specific disciplines we need, and we would rather see more focused development than a general degree provides. If we want an expert in generation-skipping taxation, we�ll groom one."

Tax and IP are very different disciplines, however, so these comments do not necessarily translate directly to your area of specialization. I guess I would say that the LLM makes the most sense if you have know exactly what you�ll study, exactly how you would use that knowledge in a legal practice and exactly how the new knowledge would elevate your expertise and judgment over the level you now possess.

I also strongly recommend that you call up the heads of the IP practices of some major firms and -- in a networking mode, not a "will-you-hire-me?" mode -- ask them whether an LLM in IP would carry extra clout. If they won�t get on the phone with you, try e-mailing them. You�re asking a fair and constructive question, and I think many well-intentioned IP practitioners would give you a constructive answer.

Sincerely,
Douglas B. Richardson
President, The Richardson Group