Wednesday, September 16, 2009

2009 OCIP Callbacks (Part Deux)

[Update: Just a brief reminder that this thread is also an appropriate place to post government callbacks (e.g., various public defender's offices, or federal positions.]

[Update: if you have been interviewing with law firms and have not yet seen this video ("what do you mean you didn't 'exactly' get in"?) you should. I meant to share it earlier but it slipped my mind.]
___________________________________________
We have come very close to maxing out the comments on the other thread. Please use this one to post your OCIP dings, callbacks, comments, questions, anecdotes, and answers. You will now find the callback/ding list here, but please continue to use the previous guidelines. As before, I will bump this thread to the top of the blog every few days until comments begin to wind down.
Allen Matkins, LA+, SF+
Alston & Bird, AT-, LA-, SV-
Altshuler Berzon, SF+
Arnold & Porter, DC+, LA+/-, SF+
Baker & McKenzie, SV+/-
Baker Botts, DC+, HOU+
Baker Hostetler, DEN+, LA-
Bingham McCutchen, LA+/-, SF+
Briscoe Ivester, SF+
Brownstein Hyatt, DEN+/-, SB-
Cadwalader, DC+/-, NY+
Chadbourne Parke, LA+/-
Chapman & Cutler, SF+/-
Cleary, NY+/-
Cooley Godward, DC+, NY-, SD-, SF+/-, SV+, VA-
Covington & Burling, DC+, SF+/-
Cox Castle, LA+
Crowell & Moring, DC+/-, OC+/-
Curtis Mallet, NY+
Davis Polk, NY+/-, SV+/-
Debevoise & Plimpton, NY+/-
Dechert, DC+, NY+, SV+
Dewey & LeBoeuf, NY+/-
Donahue Gallagher Woods, OAK+/-
Drinker Biddle, SF+/-
Farella Braun, SF+/-
Fenwick & West, SF-, SV+
Filice Brown, OAK+
Fish & Richardson, SV+
Fox Rothschild, LA-, OC-
Freshfields, NY+
Fried Frank, NY+*
Fulbright & Jaworski, LA-*
Gibson Dunn, DC+, DEN-, LA+/-, NY+, OC+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Gibson Robb & Lindh, SF+
Goodwin Procter, BOS+/-, DC+/-, LA+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Gunderson Dettmer, SV+/-
Hanson Bridgett, SF+/-
Harvey Siskind, SF+
Hogan & Hartson, DC+,/- LA+/-, NY+
Holland & Knight, BOS-, SF-
Howrey, LA-, SF+/-, SV-
Hughes Hubbard, LA+/-, NY+/-
Irell & Manella, LA+/-, OC+/-
Ivins Philips & Barker, DC+/-
Jeffer Mangels, LA+/-
Jenner & Block, CHI+
Jones Day, CHI+, DC+, LA+/-, NY-, OC-, SD+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-, TX+
K&L Gates, SEA+
Keker & Van Nest, SF+/-
King & Spaulding, DC-, TX-
Kirkland & Ellis, LA-, SF+, SV+
Knobbe Martens, OC-
Kramer Levin, NY+/-
Latham & Watkins, LA+, OC+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Lief Cabraser, SF+/-
Loeb & Loeb, LA+/-
Manatt Phelps, LA+
Mayer Brown, LA+/-, SV+/-
McDermott, Will & Emery, LA+/-, SV+/-
Milbank Tweed, NY-
Morrison & Foerster, LA+, NY-, SD+, SF+/-, SV+/-
Munger, Tolles & Olson, LA+/-
Nixon Peabody, SF+/-
O'Melveny & Myers, CC+/-, DC+, LA+/-, OC+/-, SF+/-, SV+/-
Paul Hastings, CHI+, DC+, LA+/-, NY+, SD+, SF+/-, SV+
Paul Weiss, NY+/-
Perkins Coie, SF+
Pillsbury, DC+, NY-, SF-
Proskauer Rose, LA+/-, NY+*
Quinn Emanuel, SF+/-, SV+/-
Ropes & Gray, BOS+, CHI+, SF+, SV+
Rutan Tucker, OC+
Remy Thomas, SAC+
Schiff Hardin, DC-
Severson & Werson, SF+
Shartsis Friese, SF+/-
Shearman & Sterling, SF+/-
Sheppard Mullin, CC+, LA+, OC+/-, SF+/-
Sidley Austin, DC+, LA+, SF+
Simpson Thacher, DC-, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Skadden Arps, LA+, NY+, SF+, SV+
Starn O'Toole, HI+
Steptoe & Johnson, DC+/-
Stoll Stoll Berne, PDX-
Stradling Yocca, OC+/-
Stroock & Stroock, LA+*
Sullivan & Cromwell, DC-, NY+/-, SV-
Thompson & Knight, TX+/-
Townsend & Townsend, SF+/-
Troutman Sanders, OC+
Wachtell Lipton, NY+/-
Warren & Gunn, SF+/-
Weil Gotshal, NY+, SV+
White & Case, LA+/-, SV+/-
Wildman Harrold, CHI+, LA+
WilmerHale, BOS+/-, DC+/-, LA+/-, NY+/-, SV+/-
Wilson Sonsini, SF+/-, SV+/-
Winston & Strawn, LA+/-, SF+/-
* non-OCI interview.

Labels:

197 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

First.

9/05/2009 6:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 5:13 and 5:35 from the previous thread-

You are definitely not alone. I'm right there with you- 0 callbacks and 7 rejections. I actually do have good grades, solid extracurriculars, etc, and have had some good interviews. And yet.

What I want to know is what kind of magic the people getting multiple callbacks have going for them. I know I don't suck, so I'm assuming they must be magical.

9/05/2009 8:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

809, what are "good grades"?

I also think that firms favor kids who took time off after school to do something interesting. Do others think this is the case?

9/05/2009 8:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Took time off after school and did something interesting. 1 extracurricular. Lousy grades, and yeah, they're probably not going up. 1 CB, can't count how many dings. Honestly interested in practicing law, but man, this has been a pretty depressing two weeks.

9/05/2009 9:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:47- 8:09 here.

Transfer, so can't really correlate, but 1 AmJur, another A+, mainly As aside from that with a couple B+s. Nothing lower.

And I took 8 years off after college to work and travel the world. Work included teaching underprivileged kids.

9/05/2009 10:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shartsis -
Gibson Dunn SF/SV-

2 callbacks, 3 dings.

I think older folks who have solid work experience, either in law or otherwise, are cleaning house this year. The only people I know with > 5 are over the age of 28.

9/06/2009 10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:49 from yesterday here. Again, I can't agree that being older is helping. Grades are probably hurting me, or else I'm just not interviewing with the right places, but I have significant work experience from after college and I've got 1 CB and something like 8 dings. The only other person I've talked to my age is in a similar situation. I guess the lesson is nothing new -- that there's no set formula.

9/06/2009 10:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yesterday's 10:02 here.

Yeah, I'm over 30 and no love. Zero. Zilch. But hey, at least I do actually have a prior job to fall back on, right?

Wearing my MoFo Mojo shirt today, in an attempt to draw attention and favor from the Hiring Gods.

::O Law Firm Hiring Gods! Look down upon thy child with favor! Send callbacks my way, so that I can offer thee worship in the Temple of the Golden Handcuffs.::

*Feel free to modify and use as needed.

9/06/2009 10:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good idea! It's Sunday today too.

9/06/2009 10:47 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

You all are really freaking weird.

9/06/2009 10:59 AM  
Blogger Boomtime said...

Incidentally, you must watch this video before going on any callbacks:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcaVSTsYyOI

9/06/2009 11:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Three things have been bothering me when reading comments on the OCIP posts.

1. I'm not sure everyone is aware of the formula that Boalt uses to calculate your GPA. I can only assume that law firms use the same or a very similar formula. P=2, H=3, and HH=5. This formula is on the website on the page where they explain how they determine who makes Order of the Coif. The point is, if you have no HHs, you cannot have above a B average. At most schools of Boalt's caliber, a B average is too low to get a job at most firms. I have a friend at a school ranked higher than Boalt with a 3.1 who has been told by firms that this year they have a grade cut-off, and she didn't make the cut. I mention this because people have been talking about having "good grades" or "bad grades," and I think it's important to know that Hs are Bs, and a lot of firms may see them that way.

2. None of us are entitled to a job starting at $160K after graduation. When you complain about zero callbacks, please step back and think about that. When you say you have only one callback, please step back and think about that. It speaks poorly of law schools that OCIP is the only way people think they can get jobs, because the jobs you may get through OCIP are ridiculous. Nobody should be paying any of us that amount to practice law. You are not entitled to any callbacks, let alone three or five. I hope none of us came to law school just so that we could get OCIP jobs. You don't need one of these jobs to be happy, and, although there are people who enjoy working at these firms, there is a high probability that you will end up being very unhappy. In any case, I want to repeat that you are not entitled to a job with with these firms, nor are you entitled to make this sort of salary because you went to Boalt.

3. I know the retort to that last point is going to be "but I have a million dollars in debt and Boalt owes me a ridiculously high paying job because I went into debt to pay them so much money." Remember, this is student debt, not credit card debt. It can actually look good on your credit report. Boalt has some relatively good ways to handle it, too. And it was your fault for deciding it was a good idea to bet on a job in big law in an already shaky economy when you should never felt entitled to a job paying that much money in the first place.

9/06/2009 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:49 -
Thanks for being totally unhelpful. The only function you've performed is reminding everyone that Boalt is rich with supportive, friendly people and low on people who, like you, feel the need to leave a trail of anxiety behind them.

Everybody understands the grading system, nobody thinks they're entitled to a $160k/year job, and everybody knows that student loan debt isn't the same as a $100k credit card bill. The reality is that OCIP used to be a great source of jobs here at Berkeley, and it isn't anymore. This causes stress. Having a lot of debt causes stress too. When your friends and colleagues are stressed it's probably a good time to encourage them rather than remind them that going to law school entailed financial risk.

9/06/2009 12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

H's are not B's:

http://www.volokh.com/posts/1149745699.shtml

I hate to use a single school to compare, but I do not think this is atypical. A's (A+, A, A-) are awarded to 25-29% of students at UCLA, and the next 41-52% receive B+'s/B's. This means you can be as low as the 75th percentile but still receive a B in a class at UCLA. In contrast, you need to be between the tenth and fourtieth percentiles to receive an H at Boalt. No, our H's are not B's. Note that all of this assumes the first-year grading structure; grades become slightly more permissive in the second and third years.

At Harvard, the grades are centered around the B+:

http://media.www.hlrecord.org/media/storage/paper609/news/2004/11/04/News/Grading.The.Curve.At.Hls-795530.shtml

This means that the 50th percentile gets a B+. The 50th percentile at Boalt gets a P. Yes, the 50th percentile at Harvard may be a high B+ and at Boalt a "high" P, but it doesn't change the fact that an H is between an A (mainly A-) and a B+.

Your misinformation wasn't only anxiety inducing, it was also utterly wrong.

9/06/2009 1:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

40% of our class is not getting an a-. nobody sees it that way - especially not potential employers. boalt students are hurt by other schools' grade inflation. the good thing about our system, however, is that you can completely bomb a class and hide it under a p.

9/06/2009 1:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nobody ever said 40% of our class is getting an A-, but it's wrong to say "H = B."

9/06/2009 3:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:49,

Way to be unhelpful when people are feeling down. I hope the next time you fail at something you really wanted people will be there to tell you, "you weren't entitled to it."

Thanks for nothing.

9/06/2009 4:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Poor 11:49. He or she hasn't realized that using the word "entitled" on this blog incites instant, sometimes irrational wrath. In 11:49's defense, I would like to offer a charitable reading of the comment.

1. "Good grades" aren't necessarily "great grades," and this year many firms are looking for great grades. By definition (the grading curve) not everybody can have great grades. That is terribly unfair to the many, many qualified people outside of the top 10%, and just plain sucks.

2. When one considers the entire legal market, jobs that pay $160k are the exception, not the rule. Historically Boalt has enjoyed a fantastic record when it comes to placing students in these top flight positions, and perhaps that success has distorted our view of what we should expect. If we don't get callbacks for further interviews with these employers, that's okay. It isn't a reflection on us as people or future lawyers, but rather it is a reflection on the economy. Economics is brutally impersonal, and we should all try to take that to heart. It isn't us.

3. A BigLaw job isn't the only way to handle our student debt, and if we don't land one everything will work itself out.

Maybe that still isn't comforting or supportive but I do think it's honest, which should be worth something.

Now, can I have a fucking callback already?

9/06/2009 5:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:16 here. I meant 25th percentile, 90th percentile, and 60th percentile, respectively. Statsfail.

9/06/2009 5:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since this seems to be the most appropriate place to gripe, I want in on the action.

Two weeks ago, I was a relatively positive, happy-go-lucky type of person, who assumed (baselessly? that doesn't sound like me. . .) that OCIP would likely lead to a 2L summer job. By any rough calculation of my Boalt "GPA" I'm in the top 1/2 of the class, I've got strong interview skills, interesting life experience, and lots of extracurriculars. In retrospect, I was pretty delusional about the OCIP process, especially *gulp* in this year, but I don't think any amount of forewarning could've prepared me for what ensued.

The bitch of it is, at the other end of this wormhole, I have become someone I don't recognize. I'm obsessively checking this post, ignoring everything else in my life, whoring myself out at every hospitality suite/career fair/firm reception I can drag my sorry ass to, and have remarkably little to show for it. I'm no fun to be around, and am actually causing animosity amongst friends (some in worse situations yet with far better attitudes) and family (just got off the phone with my folks -- neither of whom know dick about the law market -- who proceeded to use my anxiety as an excuse to fight with each other . . . It's like I'm 10 again!)

Takeaway point: This is ridiculous. No two-week experience, no matter how hellish, deserves this much weight in what was, up until that point, a life well-lived and enjoyed. So fuck it. I'm going to ride this out like a bad acid trip, and just get back to doing what I do best: being a good student, a better friend, a doting daughter, and a fun person to be around.

I really love being at Berkeley. And what bothers me most about OCIP is that it's taken away our sense of pride: pride in our school, pride in our own accomplishments, and pride in being in each other's company. That is unacceptable, and far more devastating (as far as I'm concerned) than losing the prospect of a $160k job, or facing student loans (which, are relatively low for any law school in the first place).

9/06/2009 8:34 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

From now on I am going to cite 8:34 when I occasionally zap comments from this blog. OCIP is hell, this thread is useful but often counterproductive, and 8:34 is right: none of the rat race is worth your happiness. Props for being able to recognize that.

Law school is a tense, status-oriented place, but even worse, it is so insular (when was the last time you spent a week with non-law people?) that losing your sense of self is almost inevitable. I'm happy to know that there remains in the 2L class a few good friends, doting daughters, and fun people to be around. You'll all be fine.

9/06/2009 8:42 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Also, I don't mean to drag you into another bout of job stress, but this post from the Faculty Lounge blog today was a frank, fair, and ultimately uplifting read.

9/06/2009 8:48 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

8:34, please shoot me an e-mail.

9/06/2009 9:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I heart 8:34.

9/06/2009 10:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 8:34. If this is the most hellish experience in your well-enjoyed life so far, then I must say you are a spoiled brat. No sympathy for you.

When you say the OCI has taken away our sense of pride in our school and in each other's company, speak for yourself. You attitude needs work.

9/06/2009 10:41 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Right. And people like you, who have obviously maintained such a delicate, fine balance, are in the best position to cast stones.

Get a grip.

9/06/2009 10:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:41 here. If she loses pride in my company simply because I can't get a job via OCI, I certainly do not want to be her friend. I even doubt that she has any real friend.

9/06/2009 10:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:20,

"Our offer, I think you'll find that it far exceeds any of your other offers. As a member of this firm, you'll be one of the elite. A life of privilege will be yours.

"Dan, we would like you to give us a blowjob. We would be very proud to have us give you a blowjob."

. . . . .

"I, I was the first of my class . . . in law."

"Well, then it should be a very good blow job."

9/06/2009 11:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

correction, "we would be very proud to have you give us a blowjob. . ."

9/06/2009 11:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:56,

I'm willing to bet that 8:34 has many real friend. Hell, after her post, I'm signing up to be president of the 8:34 fan club.

9/06/2009 11:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:34 here

"most hellish [of my life]" would be hyperbolic, even for me. I think you'll find that's not what I said. To clarify, I've found OCIP, at least at times, emotionally, physically, and mentally traumatizing (as have most my friends/classmates); but traumatizing only along the lines of unmet expectations that have ramifications on future career prospects. Not living in backyard of kidnapper/rapist for 19 years traumatizing. I do have a vague sense of perspective. However, this is a professional school; and I won't make apologies for taking personally things that seriously impact my professional range of options. Though the criticism that I probably shouldn't take them SO personally is well taken, and something of a life-long goal.

As for needing an attitude adjustment, I completely agree. That's actually the point of the post. . .

I think we're all in need of a collective attitude adjustment. For instance, I wasn't talking about my sense of Boalt pride (which has actually never been stronger), but rather the general mood around campus. Maybe I was projecting my own sense of rejection . . . but I don't think I'm imagining it entirely. The majority of us are a little beaten and bruised in the career-prospect aspect of our lives, and the abysmal job numbers seem to objectively verify that. Rather than give-in to that sense (be it individual or collective), I'd like to see us all remember to hold our heads high. As far as I can tell (even snide anonymous comments aside), we're a pretty kick ass crew.

9/06/2009 11:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

on a different note, are professors generally understanding of the fact that we have been missing classes for ocip (for those of us that have been)? is this going to be an issue, or do they just understand that it's part of the 2L year?

9/07/2009 11:36 AM  
Blogger Laura said...

They understand; don't worry about it. Remember too that most of your classes are graded anonymously. For the smaller classes where participation and so on matter just email the prof a heads up.

9/07/2009 12:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's the consensus on missing class for callbacks? For local area ones, are people waiting until flyback week or should I just start missing class to avoid getting hosed by the whole rolling offers thing?

I feel like having flyback week this late in the process puts Boalt students at a disadvantage (over kids who started OCIP earlier and were able to schedule cbs earlier). Contemplating missing class, but don't know if this is the norm.

9/07/2009 12:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:48,

If you have a large number of callbacks, you're gonna be fine anyway, so I wouldn't take off a whole week to do callbacks early. But if you have three or fewer callbacks, you should definitely skip class to attend them. It's unlikely that the "rolling offers" phenomenon will lose you a job, but why chance it. And it will be very nice to be able to stop worrying about getting a job and focus on schoolwork again.

9/07/2009 1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Could everyone please remember that the majority of lawyers work at small firms? There are many great advantages to working for a small firm. You get to do real legal work a lot sooner and you represent real individuals rather than huge corporations and white-collar criminals. These jobs are still out there. Sure, they're harder to find, don't pay as much, and you might have to pass the bar before they give you full salary, but life is not over if Big Law doesn't take you.

Did everyone come to law school for the money? Did no one actually want to be a lawyer? All of us can (and will) still be a lawyers, if we want to be.

Yes, rejection sucks, and you probably haven't experienced a lot of it. I'm right there with you. But all a strike-out at OCIP means is that you have to start somewhere else and/or the road to get there will be a little harder.

Considering how unhappy most people at firms are, this may be a great blessing. And god knows, the little guy needs some good lawyers- which I know all of you will be.

9/07/2009 1:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:34 - don't let the f-ers get you down - nice comments.

9/07/2009 9:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ditto to 9:21's comment. I graduated without a job and just started working on a temp basis for a really small plaintiff side firm. I absolutely love it and am actually glad things happened the way they did. Don't give up hope if OCIP does not come through!

9/07/2009 10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just in case anybody is wondering I did not get any callbacks today. I know it was a holiday, but still. F the world.

9/08/2009 12:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is another side to this. As a 3L who has been pushed back into 2010 by a firm who has done layoffs, I cannot understand why my firm appears to be hiring at a rate close to normal. I feel bad for this year's 2Ls, but I'm sure worried about my own spot.

9/08/2009 7:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hanson Bridgett, SF, -
Drinker, Biddle, SF, -

Fan-fu****-tastic!

9/08/2009 1:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I heart the boalt briefs. :)

9/08/2009 3:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How did the Howrey LA ding come?

9/08/2009 3:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They hired one of those planes that tow signs and it flew around in the sky for 20 mintues.

9/08/2009 3:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reading people fight on blog posts > listening to Kantian theory in Ethics class

9/08/2009 4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You mean Kantian ethics aren't on the MPRE?

9/08/2009 4:06 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

4:04, I dare you to raise your hand and ask whether fighting anonymously on blogs survives the categorical imperative. After all, if taken as a maxim it can be universalized.

9/08/2009 4:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Today I saw someone in my class who had 12 scheduled callback interviews and only 3 dings (I have no idea what their credentials were). It's a shame because that one person will end up using only one of those (or at max two) for the summer while the other eleven will go to waste - eleven opportunities that many of us could have put to good use.

Not trying to be a downer, I just think firms should take in account the fact that if a person is the very top of their class/on law review at Boalt/etc... a lot of firms are going to give them callbacks and it's not all too likely the student will pick their firm.

I think we all have to remember not to take it personally when we get a rejection. Some interviews are better than others, some interviewers are more engaging than others, and in any other year we'd all probably be swarming with callbacks. At least we are all in it together.

9/08/2009 6:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Powers That Be, can we get an awkward OCIP interview thread going. I'll start. Today, my interviewer was my ex-boyfriends big brother. I know other people have some great stories, and we could all use a mood-lightener.

9/08/2009 6:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I slept my way to an offer. Those dim hotel rooms... just sayin'.

9/08/2009 6:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In all honesty, I've gotten a callback each time I've dissed a legal market in which the interviewer has expressed disinterest. So far, I've said that the LA legal market is going down the tubes, and that SF has run dry on innovation. (These were, of course, when interviewing for markets other than LA and SF.) I am not kidding.

9/08/2009 7:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Almost second year attorney at a V20 firm here. Although I understand that many of you are concerned about your callbacks and scheduling, please keep in mind that many firms are making decisions kind of by school and it isn't necessarily true that you hurt yourself by not doing your callback immediately.

For example, my firm is only taking about 9 summers this year and we are interviewing at 10 schools. Unfortunately this likely means we will only be taking one Boaltie and so on for each school. We probably will not take anyone at at least one school. So, in all likelihood we are judging all the Boalties against each other. Just because you schedule your interview first doesn't mean you'll have an edge. Also keep in mind that we are all still have a job and overall prefer not to have everyone interviewing all at the same time.

Of course I understand the angst and worry. I wish you all well. I am not sure how well I would have fared if I was trying to land my job in the same market. If I can advise anything, it would be to accept any offer that you want quickly once you get it. You do not have the same luxury of time that people in my class did. Good luck.

Anon from class of 09'

9/08/2009 8:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reality that just hit me: The way things are turning out this year, I'll have to do this all over again next fall.

7 dings, 0 callbacks.

9/08/2009 9:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wanted to note that I got a cb this week from a firm that had already started giving out cbs sometime last week or the week before. So if you haven't gotten an official ding, silence is a good thing. I imagine they are doing some sort of waitlist system. I'll take it.

9/08/2009 9:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll contribute to the awkward/comical interview discussion:

Interviewer: Tell me about a recent conflict you were involved in, and how you resolved it.

Me: I don't really like conflict, in fact, I try to avoid it

Interviewer: This is a bad profession for you

9/08/2009 10:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:47,

You must be a really great attorney if you graduated in May 2009 and are already almost a second year attorney. Most of your classmates haven't even started working!

9/08/2009 10:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:12 - That's hilarious.

6:43 - Firms definitely do take into account that they won't get everyone they give an offer to. I know some firms got themselves into trouble last year when more people accepted their offers than was expected. That's why lots of firms do rolling callbacks and offers.

9/08/2009 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:24,

How many interviews have you done?

Don't give up hope yet. I'm sure there are firms that are interested but are uncertain about their summer programs so they are holding off on issuing callbacks.

9/08/2009 10:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if Fenwick has a summer program at their SF office in addition to their SV office, or is it run as a single program?

9/09/2009 10:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Now that screening's near over and callbacks are starting, can some 3Ls weigh in on standard time between callback and an up/down notification? Is this another "varies by firm" deal, or is there something resembling industry standard?

9/09/2009 10:14 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

I remember Fenwick telling me last year, when I interviewed there, that their entering attorneys generally start in the SV office only. I think they offer opportunities to split your summer between the two offices, but I believe you have to put in at least a couple years in SV before you can work in SF. Toney probably knows more about this than I do, though.

9/09/2009 10:14 AM  
Blogger Toney said...

Fenwick's program is run as a single program. You spend time in the SV office, and can optionally spend a big chunk of time in the SF office. Let me know if you have any questions (atjacobson@berkeley).

9/09/2009 10:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fenwick requires their summers, including SF summers, to spend the first and last week in SV.

As for associates, all associates begin in SV. Every year there is a month during which attorneys who have been with the firm for at least a year can apply for a transfer. The transfer gets approved based on space/staffing needs.

9/09/2009 10:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is 10:11 -- thanks for the information everyone, I appreciate it!

9/09/2009 10:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Foley & Lardner, (office omitted) +

This is for all of those out there despairing without callbacks: this was my first callback. It can and does happen.

9/09/2009 10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know when Covington said they would be giving out callbacks?

9/09/2009 11:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:04 - I'm not sure where you're looking and if it's the same across the board, but the Covington SF interviewer told me it could be close to two weeks...

9/09/2009 12:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:24 - that's basically what i'm looking for. i forgot to ask my interviewer and they didn't volunteer the information to me.

9/09/2009 12:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If anyone is even reading this any more . . . Any no callbacks out there left? One here.

9/09/2009 10:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At least three of my friends, all very intelligent and with incredible resumes, are still without callbacks. You're definitely not alone.

9/09/2009 10:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reading it, just have run out of anything to add.

9/09/2009 11:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm another no-callbacker. I think there are a lot of us.

9/10/2009 12:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i also know several people who do not have any callbacks yet. i know even more with only one or two. it makes me sad to think how many people aren't even getting a chance this year. i have four and feel pretty fortunate all things considered -- though i worry what the callback to offer ratios will be for the firms i'm in the running for.

9/10/2009 12:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd be interested to know what the mean and median callbacks per boaltie is. I'm guessing 1-2

9/10/2009 1:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i have a bad feeling that the mean is a lot higher than the median

9/10/2009 1:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The only callback I got was after an interview where I walked into the hotel room with my fly open, and then noticed halfway through the interview, said "Oh dear," and zipped it up.

Maybe this is a good strategy?

9/10/2009 6:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The mean is, without a doubt, many times higher than the median.

9/10/2009 11:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The mean is far above the median every year. What's killer about this year, in the terms of Algebra I, is that the mode might be zero (though I doubt it).

9/10/2009 11:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: time between callbacks and SA offers:

Varies significantly with firms. Most firms have weekly or biweekly recruitment meetings. If you have a callback the day before that meeting, you could hear back within 24 hours; also could take two weeks or more.

One bay area firm took a month and a half to give me an offer, with the partner calling to apologize that there had been a logistical error.

In this economy, I would expect to see firms being slow about sending offers on purpose, since they don't want to overextend themselves. Be patient, but I would recommend you accept early and often. Or just early.

9/10/2009 11:38 AM  
Blogger McWho said...

For what it is worth guys, this goes out to the no-callbackers:

Granted, it wasn't this year. But I did go through my 2L oci (2007) and receive (1) callback, which didn't pan out. This may have been because I put the wrong phone number on my resume...but I digress.

After OCI concluded, I had to reach out. I talked to friends, some who were in OCI and got an offer, and others who did not. Through these contacts, I managed to work my way into several more callback interviews. Of the two callbacks I got this way, both resulted in offers.

So my advice is simply keep trying. That you don't have an offer yet does not mean you are radioactive. If you keep working at it, eventually something will work out. It may not be a firm that pays 160, but it will be a fulfilling job.

9/10/2009 12:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alright, who is the lucky Boaltie who's getting a trip to Hawaii. I'm coming with you, screw this stuff.

9/10/2009 7:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seeing a firm you were excited about pop up as a "+" on N&B is such a funny way of experiencing rejection.

9/11/2009 9:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:50-

I (and most of us, I'm sure) know what you mean. FWIW though, two of the callbacks I've gotten have occurred at least a day after someone else posted a +.

9/11/2009 10:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Zero, nilch, nada.

Nope, that's not ONLY the Titans winning record so far this season.

It's also my number of callbacks.

9/11/2009 10:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gibson Dunn SF-
Winston & Strawn SF-
Simpson Thatcher NY-
Howrey LA-
Davis Polk SV-

What a great morning

9/11/2009 12:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alright, question on etiquette:

Firm X sent out callback offers by email about a week ago to others. They've also sent out rejection letters. I haven't received a word either good or bad, and my last name (and thus email address) is pretty commonly misspelled (think "ei" when it should be "ie").

Would it be improper to call/email the recruiter and followup?

9/11/2009 1:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If they misspelled your name on email wouldn't it bounce back to the recruiter and they'd know?

9/11/2009 1:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I use a gmail account on my resume, and there's someone out there who has the misspelled variation of my email address - so it wouldn't bounce. Thus my dilemma.

9/11/2009 1:37 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

Perhaps just shoot the attorney(s) you met a quick e-mail thanking him/her for taking the time to meet with you and expressing your continued interest in Firm X.

Who knows, maybe they "fixed the glitch."

9/11/2009 1:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Props to Armen for Office Space reference. Diss to Armen because GDC LA -.

9/11/2009 2:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1:17, why don't you just email the person with the misspelled version of your email address and ask if they have received any of your emails, and particularly one coming from the firm you interviewed with?

9/11/2009 3:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Filice Brown (OAK) ?

The letter at first (and second and third) glance appeared to be a rejection, but what it actually said was along the lines of "this is taking us longer than we thought, and so we're neither dinging nor +ing you right now; thanks for waiting."

9/12/2009 10:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is "O" for Baker Botts?

9/12/2009 10:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That O for Baker Botts should be HOU.

9/12/2009 10:59 AM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Oops - thanks!

9/12/2009 11:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My gosh I can barely study I got zero callbacks and am depressed and think the entire situation is hopeless. Anyone there with me? I am literally a mess.

9/12/2009 2:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2:44: Hug. i was in the same boat you are in. this is a very depressing economy.

all I can say is *Hug*, and that things will work out.

9/12/2009 3:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your feelings are completely understandable. I just hope you don't go too far down that road. There are jobs to be had out there. They are going to go to people with enough resilience to chase them down. The days of jobs coming to us are over.

9/12/2009 4:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OCI is NOT a measure of your self worth. And you have months and months to find something for the summer.

It is going to be alright, buck up kiddo!

9/12/2009 8:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sullivan & Cromwell dinged me, and I didn't even interview with them -- I just dropped off my resume at the hospitality suite!

9/13/2009 11:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:53 - same here. i think it just shows that dropping your resume off at a hospitality suite is about equivalent to doing a screening interview. s&c must have just put all the resumes/transcripts in the same pile, looked them over, and sent out rejections to those who didn't make the cut.

also got a "be patient, we're still assessing our needs, sorry" email from another firm, which i take to mean they are considering cutting the summer program.

9/13/2009 12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:32, if you wouldn't mind, which firm?

9/13/2009 3:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone heard anything from King & Spalding?

9/14/2009 11:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nope. not alston & bird either.

9/14/2009 12:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

nor greenberg traurig.

maybe i am a pessimist, but i believe that the reason we have not heard from these firms is that they are considering canceling their summer programs. it makes sense that they would take forever to call us back or reject us if they are having meetings to decide the fate of the summer program. of course, it would have made more sense for them to figure this out before oci. but they couldn't postpone oci, and they can postpone giving callbacks. so if they hadn't made up their mind before oci, it would make sense to go to oci and interview, knowing that there may not be positions for those candidates.

also, many of the firms that have yet to contact any students are firms that have very small summer programs to begin with. a firm that hosted only one or two summers last year cannot realistically reduce their summer class - they'd have to just eliminate it.

another weird thing - students have received emails requesting transcripts and writing samples from firms that did interview at oci but have not yet called back or rejected anyone (the students receiving these emails bid on the firms, so the firms received their resumes, but did not get interviews). maybe this happens every year. anyway, regardless, it may be a reason firms haven't called people back yet - they're waiting to do non-oci screening interviews with other interested applicants.

9/14/2009 12:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:33 - Would make sense for Greenberg. Interviewer told me they were only looking for one person for the summer. ONE!

9/14/2009 12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How do you feel about working at a smaller office of a national firm here in SF? I'm thinking of Arnold & Porter (15 or 20 attorneys), King & Spalding (10 attorneys), or Perkins Coie (20ish attorneys) for example.

Resources of biglaw with a small/midlaw office experience? Or forgotten stepchild that is often overlooked by the mothership?

9/14/2009 3:49 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Don't assume that forgotten stepchild that is often overlooked by the mothership is automatically a bad thing . . .

9/14/2009 3:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 9/12/2009 2:44 PM,

I'm in the same boat 18 screening interviews, 16 rejections, 2 still out but they'll be dings due to the time lapse. I actually thought an Am Jur would help. Silly me.

Look in another market. I made plans to spend fall break in a (smaller) market I have some ties to then sent out app packs with the info that I would be in the area and available for an interview and got three requests for interviews in less than 36 hours (over a weekend even).

9/14/2009 7:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The pinata today sure looked like good catharsis.

9/14/2009 9:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9/14 7:35,

I'm in the same boat as you. I too thought my AmJur along with my grades and charm would help me out. But so far, no luck.

I can't figure out for the life of me what firms want.

9/14/2009 10:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

did you amjur people with no callbacks only bid on firms like wachtell or something?

9/14/2009 10:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Harvey Siskind, SF by phone call.

9/15/2009 12:26 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

"Honey, someone named 'Harvey' called for you at 12:26 this afternoon."
"Who?"
"Harvey. From San Francisco."
"Harvey . . .? Oh - GREAT! That's the law firm I interviewed with! What did they say? Did they give me a callback!?!?!? Or was it a ding??"
"I don't know . . . I didn't get that part."


. . . ?

Please, people. Help me help you . . .

9/15/2009 12:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so... how are you helping again?

9/15/2009 12:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah patrick. they called him to ding him.

my god what a dummy

9/15/2009 1:02 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

See comment at 9/14/2007 at 2:14 PM. This isn't complicated. Some day you may have to follow a bit more opaque directions. Good to get early practice.

9/15/2009 1:06 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

But see 2:24 on this thread. There are other examples. A little levity never hurt anyone.

9/15/2009 1:07 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

*2:24 PM. Wrong comment to make a mistake in.

9/15/2009 1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

YO PATRICK SWAYZE I KNOW YOU JUST DIED AND ALL AND IMMA LET U FINISH.. BUT MICHAEL JACKSON'S DEATH WAS THE BEST ONE THIS YEAR

9/15/2009 1:11 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

HEY!
IT'S LIKE U STEPPED ON A KITTEN!!

9/15/2009 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It was a cb
But yay for more petty insults and banter on this thread.

9/15/2009 1:19 PM  
Blogger Toney said...

SWAYZE YO!!!!!!!!!! I'M SOOOOOOOO SORRY TO YOU AND YOUR MOM!!!!! I LIKE HOW YOU HELD OUT AS LONG AS YOU CAN!!!!! MICHAEL'S WAS THE BEST OF THE DECADE!!! I'M NOT CRAZY YALL, IM JUST REAL!!!!!!!

9/15/2009 1:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what firms call a person to ding them?

9/15/2009 1:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know of at least one firm that in years past has called to ding someone.

9/15/2009 1:56 PM  
Blogger McWho said...

At least last year, Orrick SF called to ding...sometimes within 24 hours.

Surprise!

9/15/2009 2:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this has been bothering me for days... but what does Sidley SF_ mean??

9/15/2009 2:57 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Oops. It was a "+". Fixed.

9/15/2009 3:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

alston bird-

this one hurts a little (more).

9/15/2009 5:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah, alston bird -. it was a great interview. sigh.

are they not even hiring anyone from boalt (or anywhere..) at all?

9/15/2009 7:17 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Offices?

9/15/2009 7:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Alston Interview I had was for all of their offices. I stated a preference for Atlanta but the rejection letter came from Silicon Valley.

9/15/2009 8:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My Alston ding came today, too. Interviewed for DC, letter came from Silicon Valley.

9/15/2009 8:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ditto but i stated a preference for LA

9/15/2009 8:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First!

9/16/2009 12:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enough with the jabs at Patrick, 1:02pm and 7:27pm. The guy is doing you a service and a favor. I'm sorry you're upset about not getting callbacks, but this isn't the time to take it out on your fellow Boalties.

9/16/2009 2:55 AM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Hey, all. I'm sure firm information is going to continue trickling in, but I'm no longer going to update the main list in this thread - from here forward you'll have to check the comments.

Best of luck to all in these final throes of OCIP.

9/16/2009 10:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Latham, NY, +

9/16/2009 1:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bryan Cave, LA +

9/16/2009 5:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MoFo DC -, Latham NYC -, Baker Botts DC -, Jones Day DC- ... that was fun

9/16/2009 5:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arnold & Porter, DC -

9/16/2009 5:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Latham & Watkins, DC-

9/16/2009 5:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Latham SD -

Not to mention, the ding told me to please consider them again when they come back to STANFORD for OCIP next year. Nice to know that not only did I get a rejection, I got a copy/paste blunder.

9/16/2009 6:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sheppard Mullin, LA -

9/16/2009 7:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MoFo L.A. -

9/16/2009 7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fulbright & Jaworski, DC -

9/16/2009 7:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal, L.A. - (non-OCIP)

By the way, does anyone know if this firm is accredited by the American Bar Association? A member in good standing of the Association of American Law Schools?

9/16/2009 7:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are there people out there with lots of interviews?

In the past, I know students often had lots and lots of callbacks.

Are there any students that are so amazing that they were able to do that this year?

9/16/2009 9:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

O'Melveny & Myers, DC-
Baker Botts, DC-

9/16/2009 9:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did anyone interview with Farella Braun on Aug. 28 during OCIP and still has not heard from them?

I'm in this position and they gave both callbacks and dings on this post a while back, so I'm wondering if anyone else hasn't heard anything.

9/16/2009 10:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:51,

I know at least 2 or 3 students who have at least 15 or so callback offers.

9/16/2009 10:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

15 callbacks?

shit, i didn't even have that many screening interviews.

i'm so not finding a job.

how much do hookers charge?

9/16/2009 10:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sonnenschein is a Vault-ranked firm. They were at OCIP two years ago at least. I don't know why they wouldn't be accredited in whatever way law firms are accredited.

9/16/2009 10:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hookers' rates vary depending on a litany of factors such as location, time, and inclusions. A good range is $20-$20,000. If it helps, I think Elliot Spitzer was paying about 6k a pop (no pun intended, I swear).
Wow 15 callbacks! Really?

9/16/2009 11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I did not receive very many callbacks, I was able to amass a large collection of law firm promotional items. OCIP 2009!!!!

9/16/2009 11:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:02: I also interviewed with Farella at OCIP and haven't heard back. I'm going with "no news is good news," or better than bad news anyway. It might mean that they are holding off on some applicants.

9/17/2009 12:01 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Latham, SF-

9/17/2009 10:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i interviewed with farella at ocip and did not get my rejection letter in the mail until yesterday.

9/17/2009 10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dinged by jones day following callback.

still clinging to the hope that one of the five firms that haven't dinged me after OCIP will still give me a callback.

9/17/2009 2:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh balls, which Jones Day office is getting back on their offers/callback dings already?

9/17/2009 3:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SF

Heard back in a week.

9/17/2009 3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dewey, SV+, by letter! Almost tossed it, assuming it was a ding.

9/17/2009 3:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Skadden, SV-.

May I note that the letter was probably the more sharp-toned ding letters I have received? No bs fluff about "good luck with your legal career... many exceptional students this year... blah blah." Instead, this note was basically, "we got tons of applicants. we're not calling you back. kthxbye."

anyone else have a particularly kind/mean ding letter they'd like to share for levity?

9/17/2009 4:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How about a no-offer by form letter? Does that count?

9/17/2009 4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, the Farella ding did at last reach me today. Oh well, I guess I knew it was coming.

9/17/2009 9:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dewey sv - by letter
munger la - by letter

9/17/2009 11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dewey sv +, also by letter. it was nice to get the heads up - i might have just tossed it otherwise!

9/18/2009 12:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Foley & Lardner, L.A., +

I sent them a follow-up email yesterday... coincidence?

9/18/2009 12:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dewey, Cheetham & Howe, NY +

9/18/2009 5:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WKRP (Cincinnati office), +

9/18/2009 6:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

lol

9/19/2009 12:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hewes & Associates, NY-*

9/19/2009 8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

you're better off without a callback at hewes.

9/19/2009 11:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone else have 0 CBs? Am I the only one?

9/19/2009 12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

so, i've been looking at that employer feedback list that the cdo puts out on the website of how many offers, callbacks, etc employers made in previous years. does anyone know if that data is based ONLY on boalt students, or if it is based on all of the people they considered? for example, when it says that a firm called back 4 and made offers to 3, i'm assuming that means they called back 4 boalt students and made offers to 3 boalt students. is that a correct assumption?

maybe this question is moot. the chart probably isn't useful because this year is so different.

9/19/2009 12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Building on 12:55's comment, how do others feel about a post-callback offer/no offer thread? I for one would really like to know when the firms I've interviewed with have made choices. Plus, I'm waiting on a few that haven't gotten back to me at all, and it would be nice to know if they've made offers to others in the meantime.

For those with 0 callbacks, I'm truly sorry, and hope such a thread isn't seen as rubbing salt in the wound. I didn't get any until rather late in the day, and remember the feeling well. FWIW, one person I interviewed with pretty much told me my extensive pre-law school work experience had been a significant factor in my getting a callback.

9/19/2009 1:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A lot of people have 0 CBs.

9/19/2009 1:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:55 -- the chart, as I remember it, is made by self-reporting Boalties only.

And yeah. It's pretty different this year. :(

9/19/2009 3:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Actually, I am pretty sure the list is complied by asking firms to report. That's why some of the firms have no reports, and some firms list all offers/CBs under a single office (and show empty for the other offices).

9/19/2009 10:50 PM  
Anonymous 3L said...

Apologies to 3:26, but I think 10:50 is correct. The numbers for my firm look like they are office (but not nation) wide. Because none of us knew how many people out office would hire, the numbers must have been self-reported by the firm. Read: I wouldn't trust that spreadsheet any farther than I could throw it.

9/20/2009 7:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kirkland, SF-

9/20/2009 7:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kirkland SF -
They personally called to reject me (super awkward).

9/20/2009 10:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 10:50- ouch.

Paul Hastings, NY, -

9/21/2009 12:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Has anyone heard from any government jobs? I interviewed with a few, including the Federal Reserve and a few others. I guess my question is about the Fed in particular.

9/21/2009 1:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

IRS said they'd take until November because everything is sent to Washington for the final decisions. The people who interviewed us only wrote evaluations but don't do any of the hiring.

9/21/2009 11:35 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

are we going to get a 2009 ocip callbacks part trois when this one gets maxed out with comments? please?

9/21/2009 3:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Baker Botts SV+
Alston + Bird SV+

Kirkland LA, offer for screening interview if I'm in the area. Kind of weird since they want to screen me to theoretically call me back. I didn't do an OCIP interview with them, though, just a resume drop.

Finnegan SV-, they sent me a really short, weird rejection that basically said "We liked your credentials but are unable to interview you further." Nothing about we don't have enough slots or anything like that.

Oh and for the person who posted way up saying only people over 28 are getting callbacks I have > 5 and am under 28 though I have worked for multiple years before law school.

9/21/2009 8:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

will someone post any knowledge they have about mofo CB/offer timeline? they were my only callback and each day that goes by without news is wearing on me. i don't know what to do if it doesn't work out.

9/21/2009 8:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

mofo where?

9/21/2009 8:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SF office

9/21/2009 8:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I got rejected after my only callback.

Now what?

9/21/2009 11:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mofo in SoCAL = nothing yet from the few I know that did it...

Mofo has given offers for SF, but that took about 3 weeks after the callback for one of my friends

9/22/2009 12:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

has anyone heard from their sheppard mullin callbacks?

9/22/2009 12:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I thought Wachtell didn't do Boalt. But someone got a callback.

9/22/2009 12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:02 - thanks. i'm literally hanging onto a single thread of hope.

9/22/2009 1:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh Patrick ... is part trois coming?? Or have we lost too much neurotic momentum?

9/22/2009 2:03 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Sure. Here it is.

9/22/2009 2:09 PM  

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home