IP is on the up: recruiters at Lateral Link share all you need to know about the booming practice area.
Planning ahead can feel like trying to fit puzzle pieces together without having the full picture of the final product on the box. But if you’ve made it through the grind of earning your technical degree and surviving law school, then you know how to navigate uncertainty – and you can do it again. Whether you’re a student starting from scratch or a seasoned attorney considering your next move, it can’t hurt to read up and explore your options. After all, what’s a good lawyer if not an avid reader?
Intellectual property law is a booming business: “the IP market is hot; lots of firms are looking for associates and partners with business,” Lateral Link’s Keeto Sabharwal, Steven Rushing, Vered Krasna, and Wendy Boone tell us. And so, we caught up with all four to learn more about the IP market itself: the realities between practicing at a boutique and in BigLaw, the technical requirements, and making a move as an associate.
Intellectual property market intel
To best understand your options, it’s essential to have some key market information to hand. A logical starting point is demand. “There are several key markets: New York, DC, Boston, LA, and San Francisco,” Sabharwal highlights, “those see constant demand and movement for associates and partners.” Of course, some districts might “be more active and friendly for patent work,” however, this has less of an impact, for example, “if you happen to do a lot of work in the district of Delaware, it doesn’t mean you’re necessarily practicing from there,” Rushing notes. That said, some locations are better known for certain sectors than others. “For those more life sciences-focused, Boston tends to have more pharmaceuticals and biologics,” he explains, “whereas it tends to be a little weaker on the hard sciences for electrical and mechanical engineering, and computer science – you can find those things in let’s say New York or DC.”
"...more of the prestigious firms are getting involved – it’s much more popular now.”
So, what’s hot at the moment? Well, the uptick in plaintiff litigation is certainly noteworthy. “When I first started in this business, there were no funders really,” Sabharwal reflects, “but now, there are so many different types of litigation funders looking to fund plaintiff side patent litigation. Before it was the smaller plaintiff shops, but more of the prestigious firms are getting involved – it’s much more popular now.” As for the sectors, “tech as well as the life sciences market is pretty active,” he notes. Rushing expands, “generally speaking, there has been an increase in life sciences on the IP side, as well as some semi-conductor work associated with chip manufacturing and design for artificial intelligence.” We’ll delve more into the backgrounds required in a bit…
In the intellectual property realm, attorneys typically fall either into the patent litigation or patent prosecution categories. “Patent litigation is always at a high floor in terms of hiring and needs in general,” Rushing headlines as “it’s harder to find people who have that background, degree and credentials, and experience to go into the field.” For patent prosecution on the other hand, the story is a little different: "Fewer general practice firms have prosecution practices, and the more senior you are the harder it is for your bill rate to make sense with prosecution; you're more likely to move to a boutique or smaller practice if you focus on patent prosecution."
For the litigators, you’ll be pleased to learn that there are options. “There was a moment a while ago where general practice firms were starting to phase out their patent litigation teams (as the hourly rates didn’t match their corporate clients),” Rushing explains, “that seems to have reversed over the years, as plenty of BigLaw firms now seemingly have robust patent litigation teams. Firms are more dynamic with rates; they are integrated into their business models,” competing with the quality litigation boutique offerings.
Patent prosecution continues to march to the beat of its own drum. Given the demand for lower rates, “activity definitely continues to move away from the bigger firms towards the boutiques and other firms in the lower end of the top 100 to 200 that have it as part of their business model,” Rushing points out. As such, “boutiques are the ones who have substantial devoted patent prosecution practices,” Sabharwal agrees.
BigLaw versus boutique
To best understand the optimal path to pursue it’s important to know what is on offer at both boutique and BigLaw firms. As a rule of thumb, “there are some really fantastic high-end IP boutiques. At smaller shops, you often have more opportunities for hands-on courtroom experience and early client exposure,” Boone weighs up, “at larger firms, you’re more likely to work on highly sophisticated, large-scale cases, often representing some of the top companies in the country, and even the world, alongside leading partners who have built very successful practices.” She continues, “If you’re fortunate enough to have stellar grades and the right technical background, starting out in Big Law is often the best path. You’ll earn great money, gain experience on complex, sophisticated cases, and then have the option to transition to a boutique later in your career (as sometimes it’s harder to go from a smaller boutique to a larger firm).”
If partnership is part of the plan, it’s never too early to start factoring this into the steps you take. When weighing up different firms, “my number one question would be what percentage of associates get elevated to partner?” Sabharwal stresses. “Often boutiques are easier to make partner at, although it’s not necessarily for the reasons most people might think,” Rushing highlights, emphasizing “there is less bureaucracy and rules set for promotion in my opinion. In BigLaw, it’s one practice amongst many others, and many places will have quotas where a group can only sponsor X number of people per year.” It’s even more challenging for patent prosecutors. “The more senior you become, the more pressure you’ll have to do things outside to maybe help on patent litigation or PTAB, because quite honestly, you’re just too expensive,” he warns gently referencing the challenge of building a portable book as well. Whereas “if you were to go to a boutique, you could probably do patent prosecution your entire career.” As you’re not competing against other practices, at a boutique, you’re much more likely to progress through the ranks.
It’s also important to understand the differences in the day to day, from hours and compensation to expectations. “BigLaw comes with the BigLaw mentality,” Rushing emphasizes, musing, “if you’re able to get into patent prosecution, that’s nice because it’s probably the most stable hour wise” although the challenge increases with seniority. “At a boutique with patent prosecution, you could clock in at 9am and leave by 5 or 6pm,” he notes. In turn, “as there’s a lifestyle balance, the comp will be lower and the billing rates are also reflective of that,” Krasna highlights. Although the compensation comparison between BigLaw and boutiques can be significant, especially at smaller outfits, “at high end boutiques, it’s still possible to get that BigLaw rate or near,” Rushing adds.
"...would you like to deep dive into a smaller number of matters on lean teams, or have a smattering of matters?”
As for the experience on the job, “associates definitely need to look at the training and hands-on experience that they will get,” Sabharwal highlights, “at an IP boutique an associate will have less competition so will probably get a lot more hands-on experience and responsibility working for prime mid-tier companies.” Whereas, in BigLaw for example, “the case could be worth millions of dollars, you could be in a random district for trial working 20 hours a day for six to eight weeks, in addition to the prep work. You could gain a ton of experience compared to the typical general litigator at your level,” Rushing considers, “it’s a strength given all the time you are spending in BigLaw.” Now, although this isn’t a hard and fast rule, “more and more IP teams in BigLaw are pushing the fact that they have lean teams, where there could be a partner, one senior, and one junior. In comparison, a team at a boutique firm might have more staff members on a matter, with a lower billing rate; associates might be able to work on more cases opposed to one or two in BigLaw,” Rushing explains, “it comes back to the question: would you like to deep dive into a smaller number of matters on lean teams, or have a smattering of matters?”
In the boutique realm, “I’ve seen several IP litigation partners move from top firms to regional or national firms in search of more flexible billing rates and fewer conflicts,” Boone notes. “I’ve also seen an uptick in middle-market firms handling more sophisticated plaintiff’s side IP litigation.” Krasna adds, “It’s litigation: there will always be client demands. It can still be intense, but it’s that opportunity to practice patent litigation with exceptional attorneys in a closer knit and smaller firm feel in a boutique setting, along with maybe having more autonomy and substantive responsibility from the outset and playing a key role in matters.”
Technical degrees, experience, and the essentials
It’s not hard to understand the importance of having a technical degree. “Those with degrees are going to get the job because patents are now so much more technical than they used to be,” Sabharwal begins. “Litigation firms are okay with an undergraduate degree in electrical engineering and computer science,” he notes, but anything beyond makes for a more competitive candidate. On the other hand, “if you’re doing patent prosecution, firms will express a need for people with advanced degrees.” Also, it’s worth noting that passing the patent exam is a requirement to practice at the USPTO. “Be prepared to have excellent transcripts showcasing that technical experience!” Krasna notes.
"For litigators, firms especially value candidates with hearing and deposition experience – and even more so if they’ve had the opportunity to present at a Markman hearing.”
For associates preparing to make a lateral move, Boone explains that “firms are always going to look at your law school credentials and technical background. For litigators, firms especially value candidates with hearing and deposition experience – and even more so if they’ve had the opportunity to present at a Markman hearing.” Also, the ability to draft is key: “you need to be a good writer,” she stresses. Krasna explains that “often I’ll have candidates submit writing samples to showcase their abilities to prepare them ahead of time, as that is part of the interview process” too.
Putting your best foot forward is crucial. “One of the main things that people don’t appreciate is their resumes,” Rushing points out, “they need to be specific about experiences.” He goes on to say, “It has to be truly interesting, so that at a quick glance a partner is able to decide that it's worth more investigation and finer review, which will lead to a conversation and a starting point in an interview for them to jump off.” Direct action specific sentences are a must! Rushing goes on to advise, “Rather than a generalized description, write a hero’s journey of how you dealt with XYZ problems, and how you surmounted it and came out with a great result for the client.”
When to make your move
Provided an IP candidate meets the above criteria, the general rule of timing for laterals remains the same across the market: “The true sweet spot is a mid-level with two to five years’ experience,” Krasna confirms. In addition to excellent grades and a technical background, something else to consider, Sabharwal notes, is “associates should be thinking about how to bring in business. That is the one thing you don’t get taught at law school. Generating business is the single most important thing associates should learn in my opinion. You need to market yourself, get out there, and network.” As such, “if associates are not getting the training that they want, they can move, as the demand is high because firms want to bring you in and train you,” he notes, “if you’re beyond a fifth year, however, it gets more difficult.”
As for making a lateral move, the switch “from BigLaw to a boutique is going to be relatively easy at most places, as you probably have pretty good credentials,” Rushing details. As for the other way? “If you were to go from a boutique to BigLaw: if you come from a prestigious boutique, or maybe the firm only hires Federal Circuit appellate clerks, you can definitely go to BigLaw; they’d be happy to take you.” He adds, “They will want to understand why you want to make a move, especially if it’s a narrative along the lines of wanting a bigger platform, more sophisticated clients, and higher compensation.”
Advice from recruiters
Reflecting on all the above, we asked our interviewees for some top tips about working with recruiters to facilitate a move. Krasna shares, “Part of my job in these initial conversations with prospective candidates is really understanding what the impetus is behind the search and leveraging the ‘why.’” Recruiters can, of course, assist candidates with posted opportunities, but Krasna notes, “I also bring a lot of unposted opportunities to help my candidates just by virtue of my relationship with firms and repeat placements.”
"The patent litigation space in particular benefits attorneys who work with recruiters with that experience, as there is a language that those in the patent space know."
A key takeaway is also the importance of working with a recruiter with an IP-related background. “I spent six years as an IP litigator before moving into recruiting, so I’m well-versed in the nuances of patent law. I’m very familiar with most IP groups in Texas – how they differ and who the key partners are – which makes it easy for me to facilitate introductions to the right attorneys,” Boone highlights, emphasizing, “work with a recruiter that understands the practice, can showcase your skills, and present you in the best light to potential employers.” Rushing echoes this point: “The patent litigation space in particular benefits attorneys who work with recruiters with that experience, as there is a language that those in the patent space know. While recruitment coordinators might not have as much of an appreciation for it, when talking to a partner on the team, there is automatically a trust factor that you know what you’re talking about.” As such, “Associates should look at the level of experience that a recruiter has, both in recruiting and whether they themselves have practiced in the field. I worked in it for a long time, I know the firms and the types of qualities and attributes that they are after and can facilitate interviews,” Sabharwal tells us.
