r/patentlaw

Hi everyone, I’m a rising junior studying Chemical Engineering getting a minor in math, certificate in packaging engineering as well as planning to get a masters in Chem E. My internships thus far have been in quality control and formulation and I was wondering how much that would help me long term. I came into college with the intentions of going to law school but I’ve read that I need a PhD or experience with semiconductors to get a good job post law school. I’m not that interested in electrical engineering, moreso the formulation part of Chem E, but I’ve heard that Chem Es aren’t sought after in this field. Is that true? Thank you!

Reverse engineering a product and then manually drafting a claim chart element by element is slow. Are there ways to speed this up?

I'm considering a move from an Amlaw 100 to a boutique. I expected a pay cut but the minimum hours are only a bit lower. What to make of this? What is an hour at biglaw compared with an hour at a boutique? Is working at a boutique that much better in terms of QOL (or something else) despite the comparable number of minimum hours?

Did you feel overwhelmed when you first started? Did you get better and when do you feel less lost when working on certain matters? Any advice would be appreciated.

I prepare, file, and prosecute a fair number of design applications; at least 30 annually, and it’s only increasing.

The “standard” views have always been: perspective, front, back, left, right, top, and bottom. I always have found this particularly annoying as it almost always creates a §112 issue with one of the planar views, most commonly the bottom since it is only seen in two dimensions. *Edit: as someone pointed out, these traditional views stem from the traditional method of producing patent illustrations*

Recently—sort of experimentally—I opted to only submit eight (8) perspective views. Everything is seen in three dimensions, from each angle, and the case sailed through.

37 CFR 1.152 provides that the “… drawings … must contain a sufficient number of views to constitute a complete disclosure of the appearance of the design.” Similarly, MPEP 1503.02 I provides “perspective views are suggested … the surfaces shown would normally not be required to be illustrated in other views if these surfaces are clearly understood and fully disclosed in the perspective.”

Based on this, I am wondering why I would even bother with the planar views if I can show every bit of the design with way more clarity in various perspective views? I would prefer to drop them entirely for this new client’s work, as the designs are pretty complex in appearance and this will at least reduce—hopefully eliminate, §112 issues.

Does anyone have an experience that would caution me against this approach?

Hi everyone,

I’m an 18-year-old student currently trying to decide my undergraduate path, and I recently came across the field of patent law, which I find quite interesting. However, I’m still quite confused and would really appreciate some guidance.

From what I understand, having a science background is important for working in patent law, especially in areas like pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. I’m currently considering pursuing either B.Pharm or a degree in Biotechnology, but I’m unsure which would be a better choice in terms of future opportunities in patent law.

I have a few specific questions:

1. Between Pharma and Biotech, which field is generally more advantageous for entering patent law?

2. Is a master’s degree necessary to build a strong career in this field, or is a bachelor’s degree sufficient to start with?

3. What is the typical pathway to becoming a patent professional (especially regarding qualifying exams like the patent bar)?

4. What kind of salary prospects can one realistically expect in this field, both in India and internationally?

I would really appreciate insights from anyone currently working in this field or who has taken a similar path.

Thank you in advance!

I’m currently a first-year EE major and I’m interested in becoming a patent lawyer as I don't feel like industry is for me. I'm good at STEM but I love the humanities more, so patent law seems pretty exciting.

The only thing is I don't know what I should be focusing on right now other than GPA.

How would you rank things like:

• EE technical knowledge
• Industry experience (working as an engineer)
• Research experience
• Internships/co-ops
• Undergraduate GPA
• Getting a master’s or PhD
• Law school prestige
• Undergraduate school prestige
• Law school GPA/class rank
• Networking/connections
• Writing and communication skills
• Patent prosecution experience / internships at firms

Also, is it generally better to go straight from EE undergrad to law school, or work in industry first and then transition into patent law later?

I'd appreciate any advice you guys might have. Thank you.

Just finished my undergraduate degree in biological systems engineering with an emphasis in biomedical engineering - heading to law school being heavily interested in patent law. What does this field look like for me? Do Bio/chem patent attorneys truly need more advanced degrees (Masters,PhD etc) or is there still work for me? Do I need industry experience to break into this field? I’ve genuinely heard it both ways, that I’m either screwed on the prosecution end or that I’ll be completely fine. I’m also interested in the litigation side of things, but I enjoy writing and reading too much to not at least attempt patent prosecution in my field. Any and all comments are appreciated. Thank you guys!

I just saw an ad on linkedin for patent bear. It seemed interesting and wanted to know if anybody's tried it? I've never heard of it before. I'm a first year patent litigator but it seems helpful so far.

I’m totally new to this and not fully sure if this requires a patent.
I’m in the Cybersecurity field and few years ago worked on a Cybersecurity enhancement that details automation of vulnerability management on docker containers, started working on this during my graduate program but finally got this published at a conference last year.
A couple of people have told me to file a patent for my work but I’m not sure what the process is or if this is top notch worthy of a patent or maybe it’s just my imposter syndrome getting the best of me on now filing.

A Cybersecurity team lead at my organization reviewed this paper and stated it provides solutions to current cybersecurity gap within the organization and wants to present this to other department leaders.

I will appreciate recommendations on next steps and open to comments as well.

Hi all,

As the name suggests, I am interested in breaking into patent prosecution space either as a technical advisor or patent agent but unfortunately I know essentially no one in this space whose brain I can pick so here I am. Based on the general state of the job market I'm wary that taking the time to move into patent prosecution may not have a good return on investment in terms of time and energy. Some notes about me:

• PhD in chemistry with a focus in pharmaceutical development and small-molecule synthesis
• 2 years of industry experience in biotech and pharma

I'm contemplating going through the patent examiner --> patent agent pipeline but also am unsure if that would just be wasting my time or not. I'm finding it somewhat difficult to find 'entry-level' patent agent job postings -- seems like everyone wants atleast a year of experience or so. I'm curious if anyone could point me in the direction of firms or in-house positions that would be willing to hire a technical advisor/patent agent starting at the ground level. I have some limited patent experience as I worked closely with my in-house legal team drafting my own patent in biotech materials but beyond that its sort of a new space for me. Any and all thoughts or recommendations are greatly appreciated.

I've heard advice in several places that the law school you attend, unless it is a t14 school, matters very little for patent law, that it is passing the patent bar and having a technical/scientific background that is most important, is this true? I'm currently deciding between two law schools, one that has a more robust IP/patent curriculum and faculty in the research area, and one that is a more general JD program, does coursework at a specific school in IP.patent law necessary or even considered in hiring?

I’ve been a SWE for a little over 5 years. I’m interested in making a switch to Patent Law (as an attorney) potentially starting out at a BigLaw. I’ve been lurking in this subreddit for a while and it makes wonder whether it’s worth it. My main issues with SWE are:

1- the constant layoffs, and once laid off your previous experience doesn’t matter at all, preparing for interviews is starting from scratch

2- the open ended nature of the job, where the required knowledge is unbounded and no aspect of the job ever gets “autopilot” feel even after 20 years

3- the entry barrier has become non existent because of LLMs

4- ageism is real, if you lose your job after the age of 45 game is over

I’m curious what you attorneys think? Again, if I’m making the switch it’d be only to Patent Law, so any patent attorneys here please chime in :)

Hey everyone, hoping to get some insight from people who've been through this or work in the field.

My background:

• PhD in Genetics (completed outside the US)
• Currently finishing a postdoc in Genetics at a US institution
• Green card holder, so no visa complications

I've been applying to staff scientist and technical specialist roles at IP law firms in Boston (Choate, Wolf Greenfield, and similar firms) and I am not getting any interviews. Not even a callback.

My questions:

1. Does it matter that my PhD is from a non-US institution? Is that a red flag for these firms, or do they care more about the science itself?
2. Is there something specific these firms look for that I might be underselling or missing entirely on my application materials?
3. Are there certifications, courses, or other credentials I should be working toward (USPTO registration exam, patent agent exam, etc.) that would make my profile more competitive?
4. Is cold outreach to attorneys or partners at these firms actually effective, or does it come across as desperate?
5. Are there better entry points into patent law for someone with my background, maybe at smaller boutiques, biotech companies with in-house IP teams, or patent prosecution agencies?

I genuinely love the intersection of science and law and I really want to make this transition work. Any advice, personal experience, or even harsh truths are welcome. Thanks in advance.

’m 3 years out of undergrad and trying to decide between medicine and IP law, and I honestly feel pretty lost.

I graduated with a BS in Chemistry and currently work in consulting, where I work closely with IP/patent lawyers. I originally planned to go to medical school and completed all the prereqs during undergrad, but after graduating I needed financial stability to help support my family, so I took the consulting route instead.

Now that I’ve had a few years in industry, I’m questioning whether I should go back to school and pursue the career path I originally wanted, or continue down the IP law route that I’ve been exposed to through work.

The problem is both paths are huge commitments:

• Medicine = 4 years of med school + residency
• IP law = likely a chemistry master’s first (from what I’ve heard, chemistry patent law is hard to break into with only a BS) + 3 years of law school

I genuinely find both interesting for different reasons:

• I liked the science/human side of medicine and the sense of purpose behind it
• I enjoy the strategy/business/technical side of patent and IP work

What makes this harder is that I’m already in my mid-20s with a stable career, so it feels risky to walk away from income and start over either way.

For people who considered both medicine and law (especially patent/IP law), how did you decide? Do you regret your choice? And realistically, how difficult is it to build a good career in patent law with a chemistry background compared to biotech/engineering?

Would really appreciate advice from anyone who’s been through something similar.

Hi, I run a tiny UK-based medical devices startup. I filed a PCT application and am on the verge of a US patent issue – just need to pay the fee in the next few weeks. However, I had wanted to file a continuation application to argue that the examiners limiting of one of my claims was not justified. I want to argue to revert to the previous version of my claims, which are still limited as compared to the initial application. I cannot afford to use the large patent attorney firm that has been prosecuting my patent for the last few years. I have written my arguments as to why I think the broader claims should be allowed and have those claims written up from when they were previously submitted. Is there anything to lose to finding an independent US agent to file the continuation application for me? If it won't risk issue of the parent patent, is it at all feasible to have this done within two weeks and for less than $1,000?

Anyone interested in signing up for the PLI patent bar course? If so, let me know so we can secure a group discount!