10-28-2014, 09:09 AM | #45 | |
Captain
284
Rep 833
Posts |
Quote:
I appreciate your feedback. Much of my current work is in the aerospace industry as well. DO-254 and DO-178 type of projects. As I was bouncing the idea of transitioning into finance through my mind, I kept going back to the fact that it would essentially render my engineering education useless which is something that I could live with but seemed rather inefficient. Along with the fact that in order not to bottle neck your career, an MBA would be required, now i'm looking at student loans and a process that will span a minimum of 2 years. Patent agent on the other hand I can continue using my engineering education as a backbone for moving forward along with the fact that I can study for the Patent Bar Exam on my own. Minimal investment, high return! Anyone in finance can appreciate that lol. Along with the fact that I could later on go to law school in order to even further advance my career. The patent agent route looks to be the most profitable. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
11-04-2014, 01:42 AM | #46 | |
Private
23
Rep 97
Posts |
Quote:
Sorry to get back to you late on this thread. So I think some others have probably answered your questions already, but here are my responses: 1) A patent agent is basically a paralegal. A lot of them ghost write patent applications, but cannot sign the applications and cannot prosecute or defend a patent before the PTO (Patent and Trademark Office). Many law school graduates waiting for their bar results operate as de facto patent agents. 2) A patent attorney is a "full-fledged" attorney, yes, but also has to pass the patent bar in addition to the bar of any state in the union. So assuming full time, you'd be in law school for a minimum of 3 years, after which you'd test for both the patent and individual state bar. I did also want to make a comment about the compensation, which someone mentioned as being low at $300K. While it is true that a partner at a big firm can pull down some larger numbers, that's typically after 7 or more years of being screamed at to increase billable hours. Even though patent attorneys do have it cushier than others, one is still expected to put in a fairly substantial load of time, maybe 2100+ hours per year, every year. And then there's the rather recent issue of "non-equity partners," who basically get a bigger salary and a nice title, but don't share in the firm's profits. This is, of course, after having to buy into the partnership, a system that one friend (a partner at a mid-size firm) has described to me as a "fucking ponzi scheme." Finally, stir in the consolidation that appears to be taking place in the industry, and you'll see that you shouldn't necessarily expect to achieve nor perhaps even want to strive for making partner. I practice in the SF Bay Area, where many, many IP attorneys eventually make the jump to an in-house position like my good friend that I mentioned. The hours are much, much easier than firm life, and you'll make decent money. Obviously it will be less than if you make partner, but again, not many people will make equity partner at a large firm. If you happen to get lucky, you'll end up at a startup and become wealthy beyond the dreams of avarice, and certainly wealthier than most big firm partners. Anyway, I hope this helps. Please feel free to drop me a line. Good luck! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|