2006 OCIP Callbacks
Much like the 2005 OCIP Post, during 2006 OCIP I will post (as up-to-date as I can) information regarding call back offers, rejections, etc. as I can. I will move this up with more info once OCIP nears, but I just want it to be available for now.
UPDATE: Ok moving up. Please look at the 2005 OCIP callbacks for format. [Firm name, Office if applicable, Callback Offer or Rejection]. Bonne chance!!!
UPDATE 2: I've noticed that this page doesn't update very well. So if you visit it repeatedly, just hit refresh on your browser.
UPDATE 3: Ok people, I have Allen Matkins, SF. It's there. Please see update 2. This is why that is there. It just creates a lot more unnecessary work for me to go through & keep deleting comments about firms that are already up here.
UPDATE 4: Moving up for the last time...from here on out you can click on the permanent thread link on the sidebar.
Akin Gump, LA -, SF +/-
Allen Matkins, OC +, SD +/-, SF +/-
Alston & Bird, DC, +
Arnold Porter, Den -, LA +/-
Baker Botts, DC +/-, NY -
Baker & Hostetler, LA +/-
Baker & McKenzie, SF +
Bartko, SF +
Bingham, Bos +, LA +, SF +/-, SV +, WC +
Boise Schiller, Oak +/-
Bryan Cave, LA -, OC +/-
Bullivant Houser, Sac +, SF +
Cadwalader, +
Chadbourne & Park, NY +/-
Chapman, SF -
Cleary, DC +/-, NY +/-
Cooley, SD +, SF +/-, SV +/-
Cox Castle, LA +
Covington & Burling, DC +/-, SF +/-
Cravath, NY +/-
Crowell & Moring, DC +/-, OC +/-
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, NY+
Davis Polk, NY +/-, SV -
Davis Wright, Port +, Sea -
Day Casebeer, SV +
Debevoise, NY +/-
Dechert, Bos +, DC -, NY +/-, OC -, SF -, SV +
Dewey Ballantine, LA -, SV -
DLA Piper, Bos +, SD +, SF -, SV -
Dow Lohnes, DC +
Drinker Biddle, SF +/-
Farella, SF +/-
Fed PD, ND Cal +
Fenwick, SV (Mtn View) +/-
Finnegan, +/-
Fish & Richardson, NY -, SD -, SV +
Fitzgerald Abbott, OAK -
Folger Levin & Kahn SF+/-
Foley & Lardner, SF, +
Freshfields, NY/London, +/-
Fried Frank, DC +, NY -
Fulbright & Jaworski, Aus +, LA -
Gibson Dunn, LA +/-, OC +, NY -, SF -, SV +
Gibson Robb, NY -, SF +
Goodwin Proctor, Bos +/-, NY -
Gordon Rees, SF +
Greenberg Glusker, LA +/-
Greenberg Traurig, Bos -, Mia +, LA -, NY -
Gunderson, SD +
Hanson Bridgett, SF +/-
Heller, LA +, NY +, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV+
Hogan & Hartson, CC, DC, LA +
Holguin Garfield, LA +
Holland Knight, Bos -
Holmes, Robert & Owen, SF +/-
Hooper Lundy, SF+/-
Howard Rice, SF +/-
Howrey, LA, SF, SV +
Hughes Hubbard, NY +
Hunton & Williams, DC, Virg +
Irell, LA +/-, OC +/-
Jenner Block, Chi +
Jones Day, LA +, NY +/-, OC +, SF +/-, SV +
Kaye Scholer, LA +
Kecker & Van Nest, SF +/-
Kelley Drye, NY +/-
King & Spalding, DC +
Kirkland, DC +/-, LA +/-, NY +, SF +/-
Kirkpatrick, LA -
Knobe, SF, SV +
Kramer Levin, NY +
Latham, Chi -, LA +/-, NY +, OC +/-, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
LeBoeuf, NY +, SF +/-
Linklaters, NY +/-
Littler, SF -
Loeb & Loeb, LA +/-
Luce Forward, SD +
Mannat, LA +
Mayer Brown, SV +
McDermott, LA -,OC +/-, SV +/-
Meyers Nave, Oak +
Milbank, LA +, NY +/-
Miller Nash, Port +/-
Mitchell Silberberg, LA +/-
Morgan Lewis, DC +, LA -, NY +/-, Phi +, SF -, SV +
MoFo, LA -, NY +/-, OC -, SD +, SF +/-, SV +, WC +/-
Munger LA +/-
Nixon Peabody, SF +/-
Norton Rose, Lon +
Nossaman, SF +
O'Melveny, CC +, LA +/-, NY +/-, OC -, SF +/-, Tok +
Oppenheimer Minneap -
Orrick, LA +, SF +/-, SV+/ -
Paul Hastings, LA +, NY +, OC -, SD +, SF +/-
Payne & Fears, OC +
Perkins Coie, Sea +/-, LA +
Pillsbury, DC +, LA -, NY +/-, SF +/-
Pircher, Nichols & Meeks, LA +
Proskauer, LA +/-, NY +
Quinn Emanuel, LA +, SF +/-
Reed Smith, Oak +/-, SF +/-
Richards Watson, LA +/-
Ropes & Gray, Bos -, SF +/-
Ross, Dixon & Bell, OC, SD +
Rutan & Tucker, OC +
Schulte, Roth & Zabel, NY +
Sedgwick, SF +/-
Seltzer Caplan, SD+/-
Severson & Werson, SF -
Shartsis -
Shearman & Sterling, SF +/-
Sheppard Mullin, LA +, OC +, SD -, SF +
Shook, Hardy & Bacon, SF +
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP +
Sidley Austin Chi +, DC +, LA +, SF +/-, NY +/-
Simpson, LA +/-, Lon +, NY +, SF -, SV +
Skadden, Bos +/-, LA +/-, Lon +, NY +/-, SF +/-, SV +
Sonnenchein, SF+/-
Squire Sanders, LA -, SF +/-
Steefel +
Steptoe & Johnson, DC +/-
Stoel Rives, SF+
Stoll Stoll, Port -
Stradling, OC+
Stroock, LA +
Sullivan Cromwell, NY +/-
Thelen Reid, DC +, LA -, NY -, SF +/-
Townsend, SV -
Watt Tieder, SF -
Weil Gotshal, NY +, SV +/-
White & Case, LA +/-, SV -
Williams & Connolly, +/-
Willkie Farr, NY +/-
Wilmer Cuttler, DC, NY +
Wilmer Hale, Bos -, DC +/-, NY -, SV?? +
Wilson Sonsini, NY -, SD -, SV +/-
Winston Chi +, DC +/-, LA +/-, NY -, SF -
UPDATE: Ok moving up. Please look at the 2005 OCIP callbacks for format. [Firm name, Office if applicable, Callback Offer or Rejection]. Bonne chance!!!
UPDATE 2: I've noticed that this page doesn't update very well. So if you visit it repeatedly, just hit refresh on your browser.
UPDATE 3: Ok people, I have Allen Matkins, SF. It's there. Please see update 2. This is why that is there. It just creates a lot more unnecessary work for me to go through & keep deleting comments about firms that are already up here.
UPDATE 4: Moving up for the last time...from here on out you can click on the permanent thread link on the sidebar.
Akin Gump, LA -, SF +/-
Allen Matkins, OC +, SD +/-, SF +/-
Alston & Bird, DC, +
Arnold Porter, Den -, LA +/-
Baker Botts, DC +/-, NY -
Baker & Hostetler, LA +/-
Baker & McKenzie, SF +
Bartko, SF +
Bingham, Bos +, LA +, SF +/-, SV +, WC +
Boise Schiller, Oak +/-
Bryan Cave, LA -, OC +/-
Bullivant Houser, Sac +, SF +
Cadwalader, +
Chadbourne & Park, NY +/-
Chapman, SF -
Cleary, DC +/-, NY +/-
Cooley, SD +, SF +/-, SV +/-
Cox Castle, LA +
Covington & Burling, DC +/-, SF +/-
Cravath, NY +/-
Crowell & Moring, DC +/-, OC +/-
Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, NY+
Davis Polk, NY +/-, SV -
Davis Wright, Port +, Sea -
Day Casebeer, SV +
Debevoise, NY +/-
Dechert, Bos +, DC -, NY +/-, OC -, SF -, SV +
Dewey Ballantine, LA -, SV -
DLA Piper, Bos +, SD +, SF -, SV -
Dow Lohnes, DC +
Drinker Biddle, SF +/-
Farella, SF +/-
Fed PD, ND Cal +
Fenwick, SV (Mtn View) +/-
Finnegan, +/-
Fish & Richardson, NY -, SD -, SV +
Fitzgerald Abbott, OAK -
Folger Levin & Kahn SF+/-
Foley & Lardner, SF, +
Freshfields, NY/London, +/-
Fried Frank, DC +, NY -
Fulbright & Jaworski, Aus +, LA -
Gibson Dunn, LA +/-, OC +, NY -, SF -, SV +
Gibson Robb, NY -, SF +
Goodwin Proctor, Bos +/-, NY -
Gordon Rees, SF +
Greenberg Glusker, LA +/-
Greenberg Traurig, Bos -, Mia +, LA -, NY -
Gunderson, SD +
Hanson Bridgett, SF +/-
Heller, LA +, NY +, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV+
Hogan & Hartson, CC, DC, LA +
Holguin Garfield, LA +
Holland Knight, Bos -
Holmes, Robert & Owen, SF +/-
Hooper Lundy, SF+/-
Howard Rice, SF +/-
Howrey, LA, SF, SV +
Hughes Hubbard, NY +
Hunton & Williams, DC, Virg +
Irell, LA +/-, OC +/-
Jenner Block, Chi +
Jones Day, LA +, NY +/-, OC +, SF +/-, SV +
Kaye Scholer, LA +
Kecker & Van Nest, SF +/-
Kelley Drye, NY +/-
King & Spalding, DC +
Kirkland, DC +/-, LA +/-, NY +, SF +/-
Kirkpatrick, LA -
Knobe, SF, SV +
Kramer Levin, NY +
Latham, Chi -, LA +/-, NY +, OC +/-, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
LeBoeuf, NY +, SF +/-
Linklaters, NY +/-
Littler, SF -
Loeb & Loeb, LA +/-
Luce Forward, SD +
Mannat, LA +
Mayer Brown, SV +
McDermott, LA -,OC +/-, SV +/-
Meyers Nave, Oak +
Milbank, LA +, NY +/-
Miller Nash, Port +/-
Mitchell Silberberg, LA +/-
Morgan Lewis, DC +, LA -, NY +/-, Phi +, SF -, SV +
MoFo, LA -, NY +/-, OC -, SD +, SF +/-, SV +, WC +/-
Munger LA +/-
Nixon Peabody, SF +/-
Norton Rose, Lon +
Nossaman, SF +
O'Melveny, CC +, LA +/-, NY +/-, OC -, SF +/-, Tok +
Oppenheimer Minneap -
Orrick, LA +, SF +/-, SV+/ -
Paul Hastings, LA +, NY +, OC -, SD +, SF +/-
Payne & Fears, OC +
Perkins Coie, Sea +/-, LA +
Pillsbury, DC +, LA -, NY +/-, SF +/-
Pircher, Nichols & Meeks, LA +
Proskauer, LA +/-, NY +
Quinn Emanuel, LA +, SF +/-
Reed Smith, Oak +/-, SF +/-
Richards Watson, LA +/-
Ropes & Gray, Bos -, SF +/-
Ross, Dixon & Bell, OC, SD +
Rutan & Tucker, OC +
Schulte, Roth & Zabel, NY +
Sedgwick, SF +/-
Seltzer Caplan, SD+/-
Severson & Werson, SF -
Shartsis -
Shearman & Sterling, SF +/-
Sheppard Mullin, LA +, OC +, SD -, SF +
Shook, Hardy & Bacon, SF +
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP +
Sidley Austin Chi +, DC +, LA +, SF +/-, NY +/-
Simpson, LA +/-, Lon +, NY +, SF -, SV +
Skadden, Bos +/-, LA +/-, Lon +, NY +/-, SF +/-, SV +
Sonnenchein, SF+/-
Squire Sanders, LA -, SF +/-
Steefel +
Steptoe & Johnson, DC +/-
Stoel Rives, SF+
Stoll Stoll, Port -
Stradling, OC+
Stroock, LA +
Sullivan Cromwell, NY +/-
Thelen Reid, DC +, LA -, NY -, SF +/-
Townsend, SV -
Watt Tieder, SF -
Weil Gotshal, NY +, SV +/-
White & Case, LA +/-, SV -
Williams & Connolly, +/-
Willkie Farr, NY +/-
Wilmer Cuttler, DC, NY +
Wilmer Hale, Bos -, DC +/-, NY -, SV?? +
Wilson Sonsini, NY -, SD -, SV +/-
Winston Chi +, DC +/-, LA +/-, NY -, SF -
posted by Armen Adzhemyan at 5:00 AM
158 Comments:
Other than the fact that the Anonymouse would appear to be a pathological liar, 2Ls heed this advice:
Check the callback accept/offer ratio in the guide book that the CDO provided. It should inform you well. I think the firm average is that every callback yields between 0.33 to 0.67 offers.
My personal experience was that every two callbacks generated one offer, though the sample size is small and heterogeneous (i.e., if I traveled, I got an offer, if I just crossed the Bay, I got repeatedly shut out).
Good luck all,
(and interview with Wms. & Connolly, finest of the firms)
Allow me to refine my prior post. I loved my firm, and I loved DS's firm. I had the honor of tagging along at one of their events, and I found them to be scholars and genlemen, brilliant gazelles and graceful chimpanzees - I would be honored to more associated with their awesomeness were I to locate in their city. You'll just have to ask DS for more details.
11:09, while not entirely truthful, does give one good piece of advice that all 2Ls should pay attention to. If you happen to see that someone got a call back from a firm you have not heard from yet, don't worry. DS's firm gave him a callback a little over three weeks after the interview date. On a Sunday. At 8 PM.
Some firms move faster than others. Some interviewers move faster than others. DS seems to remember the CDO OCIP guide saying if you haven't heard from a firm within the week, don't get your hopes up. That advice is bollucks.
Random thoughts on Boalt and gunners... so Boalt is supposedly (and we want it to be) an uncompetitive place. And the hallmark of a competitive person is wanting to be better than anyone else. So the most uncompetitive person is the one who doesn't compare himself or herself to anyone else. And that would also be the person who cares least about what other people do. So wouldn't the most uncompetitive response to OCIP be to let people either talk or not talk about their results without becoming too upset?
ONLY OFFER OR REJECTIONS BELOW THIS COMMENT.
I've deleted all comments that didn't offer anything useful for OCIP (including my own insults at anonymous conscientious objectors and DS's impeccable Pulp Fiction quote). I will also delete the offer/rejection comments as they come in.
I vetoed postings about class last year, and do so again this year simply because the 3L slots are so few that there is no meaningful anonymity. Assume these are 2Ls.
As a 3L OCIP veteran, I would just like to point out that last year, this thread was less about people boasting about their OCIP success and more about getting somewhat reliable information of when firms were beginning to make callback invitations.
While reading those messages can be stress-inducing, it also was helpful in getting a sense of where you stood in the process. Especially early in OCIP, if you are finding firms you interviewed with are making callback calls and you're not receiving them, then it's time to re-examine your interviewing strategy and try to make adjustments so that you can kick ass in phase 2.
So overall, I think this thread can actually be a very helpful resource to everyone rather than a red hot circle jerk.
I only wish we had a resource like this at Michigan. Here you only hear about your close friends or the more obnoxious superstars, and for me, that wasn't very helpful since I was applying to mostly Silicon Valley (and other California) locations, where very few superstars from Michigan actually go (we're pretty NY and Chicago focused). And I noticed Silicon Valley offices were much slower to get back to us than SF or especially big LA firms, but all were way slower than East Coast. That could be a Michigan thing, but anyhow, I think this list thing is a pretty good idea especially as you're deleting who actually posted things.
So we're already four days in and only four firms have given callbacks!?! That is not a good sign. Perhaps the message boards are right when they say that Boalt's prestige is in decline. Or, hopefully, it is just that most people have too much tact to post their callbacks here. Regardless of what's going on, bon chance to everyone!
Anyone who bases his opinion of a school's reputation on message board discussions has no standing to talk about tact. Seriously.
Looks like this thread is dead. Red hots everywhere must be weeping.
How are these postings confirmed? Can't people just post total BS about callbacks?
I noticed Cravath couldn't even fill out its interview schedule. Boalties are lazy!
4:55, you're off base with your red hot comment. The thread mostly helps students in the vast Boalt middle who might need to know that they have to interview with a few more places b/c Skadden or MoFo or ReedSmith or whatever firm isn't likely to come calling. While it is true that some firms do several rounds of interviewing, most of them will give their callbacks in one fell swoop. Without the thread, you could be sitting there for weeks thinking you still have a chance.
Where do the 3Ls go to post about their clerkship callbacks?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
It appears Armen is deleting any comments about red hots or that are critical of the OCIP-is-the-coolest-and-bestest-thing-ever attitude exhibited by the people who run this blog. I don't thing that is very cool but it doesn't matter because Armen will probably delete this comment too.
I'll keep this one as an example of the briliant and insightful thoughts of the people who have recently begun posting here. I admire you, I really do. A life where two seconds worth of critical thinking are non-existent...ahh to be ignorant again. I suppose it's really easy to see a post that facilitates the dissemination of information and think that anyone remotely associated with it must be, oh I don't know, pointing a gun at Boalties forcing them to go through OCIP or to post the results here. Kind of like by watching football I'm realling making the world a more competitive place. I don't want to get into the war crimes I've committed by taking a class with Prof. Yoo. That's the kind of idiocy involved here. Again, on some level I admire you. I don't even know you. You probably don't know me or any of my co-bloggers, and it really sounds like you don't know a damn thing about this school. That's mostly why admire you. Without knowing a damn thing, you really have the balls to pass your judgment, AND THEN OBJECT WHEN I DELETE YOUR NON-SENSICAL DIATRIBE.
Let's take a walk back in time, shall we? This time I'll hold your hand to make sure you don't stray too far oh wee one. I first created the OCIP thread in 2005 at the behest of COMMENTERS like you. However, it bears repeating (and I've repeatedly quoted myself apparently upon deaf ears the likes of yours) what I said to go along with that:
"I'm creating this post to the extent that readers might be interested. But I want to add my own personal thought that this is much ado about nothing. I don't understand the frenzy surrounding this whole process. You WILL get a job. It's unfortunate that you only get one chance to interview as a summer associate (assuming you weren't a summer associate last year) but at the same time barring a criminal history or a loud fart during every single interview, I think we'll all do fine. I also want to add that if any firm ever asks me why they should not hire me, the one answer that I will ever give is that because my classmates are incredibly brilliant and far more qualified than me. Best of luck to every one."
And actually I was quite pleased with how it all turned out. Most people turned to this blog for the first time around then. A lot of people hated looking at the info, but they did anyway out of a "need to know." Some were quite witty with how they posted info. This one in particular still cracks me up: "I just got a Kirkland rejection letter. Why did I volunteer to help the homeless in high school? Stupid!" But I also want to toot my own horn. Last year when people began to request more and more information, I wrote the following comment:
"I've been meaning to add a few ideas of my own. Can people also add if:
-- Interviewer had firm or so/so handshake.
-- Person after you knocked 10-20 seconds early.
-- Boxers or briefs?
-- You used note cards, web printouts, or FOIA requests to research the firm
-- Considered inviting interviewer to bar review
-- Your grades"
There were those who didn't think it was useful, and I've heard through the grapevine that the CDO is non-too-pleased. But the solution to that is (a) don't read and (b) don't freak out when you do read. And that's why I'm really not interested in hearing from the likes of you. It's just a waste of comment space.
So, Dear I'm Too Cool For OCIP, to paraphrase the words of Winston Wolf, Pretty please, with sugar on top. Shut the fuck up. Or voice your concerns to me in person.
Armen is so senstive about his blog's "contributions" to the Boalt community! It's kinda cute.
I think the debate between Armen and the "gunners" and the commenters whose comments have been deleted (or at least those I've seen before they were deleted) provides an interesting illustration of the point Cass Sunstein makes in Republic.com about "cyberbalkanization." Sunstein argues the tendency for people to use the internet to seek out only views they agree with causes public debate to become more parochial, close-minded and extreme on both sides.
This exchange exhibits these characteristics but I think the censorship prevents us from reaching the middle ground we might otherwise reach. Armen and the gunners have their rah-rah approach to OCIP and prestigious law firms and the commenters being deleted think the obsession with OCIP and firms is disgusting and the type of red hot behavior that is uncharacteristic of Boalt. Leaving up all of the comments would allow Boalties to see that not all students at Boalt think their highest calling (for at least the first few years out) is working at an uber-prestigious and high-paying big firm. It is good for everyone to remember, especially duing OCIP, that many students see the firms as pied pipers, resent the type of grade-based hierarchy they reinforce and really hate the snobby comments coming from red hots ("Gibson Dunn would never hire someone with her grades," "I'm reconsidering whether to go to Orrick because I can't believe they hired the guy who had straight P's").
These two positions represent extremes but allowing Boalties to see them both side by side can help people to work out how they feel about these issues. Perhaps it could even lead to more civilized discussion and more nuanced anonymous comments, although that may be asking too much in this polarized age.
Bottom line: I concur with Earl Warren; Armen should restore the deleted comments.
Fletcher, concurring:
Of course, we could just remove anonymous comments. Wouldn't that be a shame.
I actually have to disagree with J. Warren. A moderated forum better funnels discussion. There are alternative areas for discussion, so all views can be presented - somewhere. Here, I like things the way they are.
i think "nuts and boalts" is facing somewhat of a identity crisis. is it a blog where tom can recommend coffee shops and handicap finals or is it a forum for boalties to vent anonymously and/or shit on armen? personally, in my anonymous opinion, i'm all for the latter, and the comments, but then again, i'm not being personally attacked.
Identity crisis? Where have you been the last 2 years? That IS the identity of N&B. As an aside, Tom's coffee shop was shut down by health inspectors. I don't know what that says about other Nuts and Boalts endorsements.
Those overzealous health inspectors. I loved my cup of coffee.
There's also a new place called Mokka on Telegraph, just south of Ashby. Complete stylistics flip from the Happy Cafe, but just as good.
For people who want a change of programming, I have a three-topic post on absolutely weird ideas in the works.
Uh-oh. Earl Warren used the "f" word when he mentioned blogofascism. Now Armen is Armen going to hit us with the Orwell quote on fascism again?
Reed Smith, SF +
Nixon Peabody said they'd get back to us in 24 hours, so I'm assuming...NO
anyone care to address this one? i'm not sure i agree w/advice given - http://www.law.com/jsp/printerfriendly.jsp?c=LawArticle&t=PrinterFriendlyArticle&cid=1032128794639
Of course I agree with it. The key part is that if a firm considers your marital status then that's not a firm you want to work for. Anyway, this reminded me of a comment left by someone at the OCIP stories thread from last year:
At a callback lunch, I told the two junior associates I was with about certain firms' proclivity to send rejection letters to students who hadn't even interviewed with the firm.
They said that was nothing: a Boalt student some time in the recent past received a rejection letter from a major firm with her resume stapled to it. Upon the resume was a handwritten comment: "Two children. No."
Maybe my experience is not typical, but at my firm half the summer associates were married. (And among those married it was split fifty-fifty gender-wise. Half were married men and half were married-women).
anyone hear from wilson sonsini?
Oops...I was the dewey ballantine reject. It forgot to include that my ding came from the LA office.
Thanks for moving this up Armen.
Schulte Roth & Zabel (NY) +
8:29, I hope you like hedge funds and coke!
i call bullshit on that story about the "two kids. no."
Yeah, isn't family status a protected class under either CA or federal employment law? If so, I want to be the plaintiff's lawyer that gets that case. I'd probab;y have my share of the settlement within an hour.
In response to Tacitus, I think the lack of negative-result postings is partly just a function of the fact that most firms take a much longer time to get back to you with rejections. I was receiving snail mail rejections all the way into mid October last year. I think firms a) are lazy about getting the rejections out, and b) like to keep at least some names in reserve in case their yield from the call-back-offerees is lower than expected.
Have to agree with Isaac here. In fact, there are some firms I never heard from at all. I wonder if I'm still under consideration for summer '06 employment.
While I'm at it, since I'm one of the "people who runs this blog" (which, by the way, sounds way more ominous than it is--and I'd point out that only one person really runs this blog), I weigh in concurring with Fletcher and Armen that the comments here are more useful if they are not spiralling hatefully out of control with ad hominem attacks. Generally, I like my discourse unfiltered (and with other threads it is), but being that this thread is, and always has been about serving a very specific purpose, I think that if that purpose (cold hard information) is served by moderating comments, then so be it. As someone who both loathed OCIP and found this blog very useful last year, I can attest to the fact it's a lot less daunting to log on without the prospect of seeing someone's venom spewed across the screen. OCIP is tough and draining enough as it is.
any JONES DAY (menlo park) for 3Ls? THANKS!
3L jones day menlo park (+)
Nixon Peabody, SF, -
by email: tacky!!
Can we get boalties to contribute to:
http://www.summerassociate.com
See, that's the kind of uber comepetitve website that I would never post to.
anyone hear from cooley palo alto yet?
Dings are really rolling in now:
Baker Hostetler LA -
McDermott, WIll & Emery LA -
Morgan Lewis LA -
Arnold & Porter LA -
Happy now Tacitus? ;)
Interesting development: Received a callback invitation for Bryan Cave OC yesterday. Today received a rejection letter from Bryan Cave. Huh???? Not only did they reject me, but they said that "Evan Chuck" enjoyed meeting me - and I interviewed with the OTHER guy!! I am a little offended. Is this wrong? Should I discuss w/Bryan Cave or someone else?
No one's heard from the following "F" firms???
Farella, Braun + Martell
Fenwick & West
Finnegan
Fish & Richardson,
Was Quinn just giving out offers at the end of interviews today? Was that the same for all offices?
Nixon Peabody, SF -
Morgan Lewis, SF -
Holmes, Robert & Owen, SF +
Drinker Biddle, SF +
Knobbe, Martens Olsen & Bear emailed asking for my UNDERGRADUATE transcripts! Ummmm...why? But I guess that is a good development.
Regarding the comments in this thread, man people need to chill. Why come on here in the first place if you are going to say something against it? Get a grip.
Does 0 callbacks + 2 dings at this point = no job?
Greeberg Traurig (LA), - ("we have had an overwhelming interest in our nationwide summer program and our New Rules culture...)
Bryan Cave (LA), -
9:17, no of course it doesn't. I'm willing to bet quite a few of your classmates are in a similar position. But I would think about adding some interviews and passing the resumes to a few extra firms. Go to the CDO and go over your interviews. Do you remember anything in particular they focus on? If you look at the list of people they interview each day, is it that you just don't stand out? Please don't take these as insults or anything, far from it. I just think that overall, if you're not getting the fish to bite, you should make some halftime adjustments.
NOTICE TO POSTERS: My parents will be in town this weekend. Bear with me as I will not be updating with the lightning speed frequency that you've come to expect. I ask that you read the post and the comments to see if something has been posted. Repeat posts are really time consuming to deal with, so please be mindful.
Lastly, it's really tacky to post summer offers. Why? I don't know. But the one comment that did do that rubbed me the wrong way. Continue to kick some arse Boalties! Except 9:17. Kidding.
FURTHER NOTICE: I am not deleting posts that strike me as witty (e.g., e-mail rejection) or ask a question. So if you want to separate your firm postings from questions, fine by me. But if you keep them in a single post, I will just keep the whole thing.
Does being invited to a dinner usually mean a call-back?
Not at my firm. They invite the superstars they really want to recruit, and then people they're not sure about and need to check social skills and proper fork usage. The majority of call-backs DON'T get a dinner invite.
With some firms, an invitation to dinner is a callback. If you went to dinner (not a reception) with the firm, chances are you will get a callback. At my firm, an invitation to dinner IS a callback.
any jones day NY?
did cooley just call?
When did cooley call?
what time did cooley call? do firms usually make calls all at once?
when did farella call? last night or this morning? thanks.
If you don't hear anything after people have started to get callbacks is it ever possible that a ding IS NOT imminent?
I'm glad no one is responding to the crazed requests for time stamps on when the calls were made. I can't even begin to list all the reasons why such requessts are dumb.
Actually, the calls all tend to go out at once, so it's a legit., not a "dumb," question
You win, it really is "legit" to know when you didn't get a call that was supposedly a part of a mass wave of calls made at the same time. This is like a dead person dying to know when his time of death was.
In fact, why don't we also note with an M, F, or ? the gender of the caller. Was the voice husky or borderline falsetto? Who's your cell service provider? In fact what's your name? What's more legit than trying to find a correlation between interview slot and time of callback?
Don't drink the Cooley-ade. Probably just xoxo trolls.
Heller SD-
"After thorough consideration, we regret that we will be unable to invite you for further interviews."
I guess they could have given more thorough consideration before they dinged me by e-mail. Yuck.
What's "WC"? (e.g. "Mofo WC")
scratch that last question... a quick trip to the MoFo web site cleared up the mystery. (WC = Walnut Creek)
I got my favorite rejection yet by Allen Matkins LA today.
"Unfortunately, while your credentials are impressive, we are unable to offer you the opportunity for further interviews at this time. We trust you will accept the extremely difficult decisons we are called upon to make during the recruiting process?"
WTF? Do I have any other choice but to accept the rejection? Aside from that, those jerks made me wait ten minutes and didn't even apologize for going way over with the other person, which made me late to my next interview.
armen, no need to be a prick when someone is looking for more information during a stressful time.
There's really no pleasing you guys is there? I'm a gunner for having this thread. Or I'm a prick for limiting it to RELEVANT information.
I've been through OCIP, and yes, there is no need to unnecessarily be a prick. I'll grant you that. But I really have a short fuse when I get contradicting criticisms. You guys can anonymously make up your minds.
But I rant. If I added to the stress OCIPers are going through, I'm sorry. I definitely don't intend to do that. If this list is adding to that stress, so that it's not worth it, please, let me know that as well.
This thread is a HUGE service! Thank you Armen! Back off, fellow OCIP-ers.
*giggles like a school girl*
Let's change it from "OCIP" to "the OCIP." It sounds a bit more stuffy, which is fitting. Kind of like "the Cravath firm."
Armen,
As a 2L, I totally agree that the people requesting time stamping are ridiculous. Please don't judge the rest of us by a few red hots. Besides, it is probably the same crazy person posting multiple times. This thread has been incredibly helpful and I have absolutely no complaints on how it is being moderated. Thanks again for putting up with the crazy red hots all in the name of helping out your favorite whiny 2L boalties. :)
11:41 is probably Armen sockpuppeting.
My worst rejection line yet: "I am very sorry to report that our firm has decided not to pursue further employment discussions with you at this time." Ouch!
Winston & Strawn LA -
The nicest rejection yet (not from Winston):
"Our decision has little to do with your ability to suceed or how much I enjoyed meeting with you. Please accept my best wishes both in your continued studies at UC Berkeley and in what I expect will be a very sucessful legal career"
Awww...wasn't that nice?
Thelen Reid SF-
Sonnenchein SF- (they don't waste any time with those dings!)
anyone hear from fenwick mountainview?
Fenwick MV + (just called 5 mins ago)
White Case LA (-) via email. Is it just me or is this super tacky? I think my inbox should be reserved for callbacks only, not rejections. Its bad enough I have to feel a sense of impending doom when I open my mailbox, why should I have to face the same thing when I open my inbox? Is nothing scared?
Covington DC +
Where's MoFo SF already?
MoFo SV & SF indicated that it might be up to two weeks from interview to hear back about a callback. Kind of ridiculous, especially since they were in phase 2.
Debevoise NY + (via mail sent out 5 days ago. Surprise!)
Steptoe DC -
Skadden LA -
Keker & Van Nest's rejection was interesting. They encouraged me to apply again for a permanent position next year or after graduation. They want me to "keep them in mind as I continue to develop my post-law school career plans."
Of course I'll keep them in mind - as a firm that rejected me.
8:11 PM: thanks for the info!
9:24 PM: I got the same rejection... I think it's because they usually hire people who have already graduated and completed a clerkship. This is their first year having a real summer program, and they said they're only expecting to take one person (max) from each school they interview at.
What is proper protocol for communicating with a firm that you gave your resume to in their hospitality suite, and talked casually to an attorney and/or recruiter?
Do they normally send a rejection letter (assuming no offer) in these situations? What if they've given out both offers and rejections, but I've gotten neither -- OK to email and ask what's up?
9:45--did you get the business card of the person to whom you gave your resume? I would email that person, remind them that you gave them a resume, and ask if it would be possible to set up an interview. Stress that you really enjoyed meeting with them and say something specific about the firm. Good luck!
And frankly, if people have a problem w/ how Armen moderates the blog or this list, they can a) not read it or b) start their own blog and see how well they tolerate anonymous hate comments.
Gotta love being a 3L and having firms reject you from their summer program. Can't they use a different form letter? Thank you Quinn, Latham, and Boies. You've all made my shit list.
Boies Schiller + (EMAIL)
anything from fried frank NY
Shearman & Sterling (SF) -
Shearman & Sterling (SF) -
Yes, they sent me two rejections, both envelopes addressed to me but one bearing the name of a classmate.
Bonus points if you let the classmate know by an anonymous comment on this blog.
Also, I'm counting 119 distinct firms so far, plus the many, many offices that some of these firms have. Not too shabby.
8:50, I suggest putting it in the person's locker with a noe.
Anyone know what's up with Altshuler Berzon? Are they so super liberal elite that you're simply to divine the existence or non-existence of a callback? Or do they not get to callbacks until they've finished hiring Breyer's and Ginsburg's clerks for OT 07?
When did MoFo SF calls go out?
So much for "one to two weeks."
are 3Ls getting callbacks? i haven't recieved any from OCI and am wondering now if i should be exploring other options.
MoFo calls went out this morning (Tuesday, 9/26). Don't sweat it too much, the guy said they did two rounds, which explains the up to two weeks.
10:52, are you suggesting that they would be calling some people today and others a week later? Seems highly doubtful. I imagine they have 1 hiring committee that met and made decisions.
I know for a fact that that happens in at least some firms, as I have recieved callbacks more than one week after others did for a firm. It is likely they are gauging the response to the first round of callback invitations.
3L here with no call backs, but I know a couple 3Ls who have had call backs with firms I didn't interview with. To preserve their anonymity, I won't reveal those firms.
If MoFo SF is "gauging the response," I wouldn't hold my breath for a second round.
Thanks all for the helpful info.
I too know of 3Ls with callbacks.
for 3Ls with callbacks, how many are people getting? 3? 5? 10?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
1:09, I think your post was BS and so I deleted it. If not, e-mail me.
Hey 9/23/2006 11:26 PM was that rejection from O'Melveny?
p.s. I heard MoFo hasn't even met to discuss candidates yet
4:41, it appears that people have already recieved callbacks to MoFo SF. Are you sure your info is correct? (I wish it were, but alas, I fear we've missed the MoFo boat...)
Armen: it is BS that you used the word BS! the 1:09 post is certainly not!
1:09 is Armen sockpuppeting.
Am I the only Boaltie getting rejected by LA firms? I feel like I am doing all the heavy lifting here.
Kirkland LA-
7:14, I thought I had "insider" info. Maybe not as inside as one could hope...
What is "sockpuppeting"? And why did the comment at 1:09 get taken down for being BS? Did they post a SCOTUS clerkship or an offer from a firm before they could have done the callback? Or is Armen merely making a judgment that a particular firm is done calling people back so the person couldn't have just now gotten a callback (see the MoFo discussion)?
1:09 claimed a callback from Wachtell (write in). Wachtell has never offered a callback to anyone from Boalt. That's why I thought it was bull shit. I still have not gotten an e-mail from 1:09 (shockingly).
Sockpuppeting is what Mr. Garrison does on Southpark.
I'm a 3L with multiple callbacks, though in random locations. Some firms have told me they won't make decisions until later...
i'm sure this is discussed elsewhere, but....
for call backs, do you send thank you letters? emails? Nothing?
It seems sort of like overkill, I mean, I thanked them in person already. I don't see how a little note is going to change their opinion of me after they already had a half hour of talking with me. Plus, if I were on their end, I imagine it would be kind of an annoying thing to receive.
But, I'd like to hear your thoughts...
go bears!
The CDO recommends NO thank you cards during OCIP, but they do encourage thank you cards during call backs. But Disco Stu and I both completely disagree with the latter. Thank you notes/e-mails are a nice gesture, but unnecessary. The few exceptions I made to this rule were for recruiters who arranged travel, hotel, etc.
I think thank you cards are unlikely to hurt (unless you make some stupid mistake), and unlikely to help. Evaluate for yourself whether you are more likely to make a typo in a thank you letter compared to some weirdo on the hiring committee being offended by the lack of thank you letters.
Why is it so hard to believe Wachtell would give a callback to a Boalt student who sent them a resume? They recruit on campus at PEnn for chrissakes!
Is there office information for the Holland ding?
So it's official that MoFo SF has made callbacks?
yes, mofo sf has done callbacks
The Fed PD North Dist. had two offices interviewing at OCIP--one Oakland, one S.F. Which sprung the call-back?
The comment stated SF.
Cooley SF -
Simpson LA -
It's good that I get rejected so much because I really am a carrier of the Plague.
I got a rejection letter from Gibson Dunn, but from their LA office even though I was interviewing for their SF office. Anyone know if their hiring decisions all come from there or if there was a mix up? I know this is wishful thinking, but I had to interview on their LA schedule due to a time conflict, but I did say that I was interested in SF. Urg.
My hunch is that there's no mistake, but if you want to "make sure" you should e-mail your interviewer to ask. I mean make sure you have the proper tone, but nothing wrong with e-mailing to double check that they knew you were interested in the SF office.
Why have 10 firms still not dinged or called me back after they've dinged and called back others?
MoFo SD+ (msg said cali recruiting committee just met again on friday in SF...so maybe more callbacks for SF too?)
6:15, obviously because they're really on the fence about you.
I bet a lot of these places are just plain old disorganized and lose track of some applicants.
6:15. This would be a good time to be pro-active and do some follow-up calls or emails. Hopefully it'll show some initiative and might sway some decision-makers if they're still on the fence. You really don't have much to lose at this point.
Hey 3Ls:
What is the longest you ever waited before getting a callback from a firm? What is the longest you had to wait to get an offer after a callback? The waiting is killing me.
I'm a 3L who is waiting too.
I did a call back a week ago and haven't heard a thing. I did another this week that told me they wouldn't make offers until the end of the month because they only had a few spots and wanted to be sure they'd seen a majority of applicants. However, they did say that a rejection could come sooner. So, though it is frustrating, I'd say, no news is good news. I wouldn't be shy to follow up to show your enthusiasm -- they're going to have some tough decisions to make.
11:39, I have a hunch you're asking about our experience last year, as opposed to 3Ls interviewing this year. My memory is a bit hazy, but I know for sure I did not wait longer than 2 weeks. I think there were a couple that took 1 week to get back to me. The dings sometimes took a long time, but then I'd see that callbacks had already been made, so I didn't hold my breath. Anyway, it's always wise to do what the commenter above you suggests.
As for the Gibson rejection, the notification is made by whoever interviewed you, regardless of the office you interviewed for.
Question for people who did ocip last year ...
Do firms with smaller summer classes (3-4 people) usually take longer (more than a week) to make offers? still waiting here
did fried frank just start sending rejections?
i'm a 3L also waiting.
all the firms i did callbacks with said they might not be able to tell me until november 1st. i'm like great...that really gives me enough time to make a decision.
Moving into the next phase of obsessed calendar-watching... how long after a callback can/should one expect to receive an offer or rejection?
There are no secrets at that point. If you meet with the RC, ask him/her, but usually they tell you even before that. Rule of thumb is next meeting of the hiring committee after your interview.
I apologize for the delay in updating the firms, but I'll get on them soon.
re: Armen's comment about the RC telling you when to expect a decision -- it's often bullshit. RCs job is to lie. One firm told me they wouldn't be making decisions until later in the week because their hiring partner was out of town. They gave an offer to a friend of mine that very same day.
I'm sure also that they give offers to people they really want right away and maybe wait until they reject it to extend the offer to those of us that were mediocre. Just a hunch but it seems like a logical one.
Bingham SF, - (In addition to the letter, my envelope contained a suppliment to a GERMAN LEASE, executed on October 4th. Way to go guys...)
Perkins Coie Seattle- For a touch of class, they added a survey. Yeah, I'm going to fill that out after you rejected me.
Orrick, SF, - (by voicemail! classy!)
Jones Day SF- (interesting seeing that I didn't even interview with them), MoFo SF-, O'Melveny SF-
Allen Matkins, SF, post-callback (-). (Is that ok to post that Armen, or is that too much information?)
See post on top. I'm not that interested in offers extended, but once you guys start accepting I might take that info. But I'm open to suggestions.
At this point, it would be nice to know where students have accepted offers...
Allen Matkins SF post-callback -
Has anyone been offered more than $2600/wk? My offer said it would be $2600 unless other firms offer more (seriously, I think that $2600/wk is a sickening amount of money, but I'm just curious).
I was offered $5625 semimonthly by one firm (San Francisco).
Sheppard Mullin, SF -
Bingham WC -
Sullivan SV-
9:44 - yes. 160 pro-rated is more than 2600/wk.
Post a Comment
<< Home