One more DOJ topic - DOJ Antitrust

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You have a lot of moving parts, and I am trying to get a handle on them all. First, is your goal to be a litigator? If so, you are unlikely to get a lot of litigation experience at ATR - some, yes, but not as much as in some of the other DOJ divisions by a long shot. There is an opportunity to do a six month detail to the EDVA USAO, but then there is a two year commitment to return to ATR.You could strike it lucky and get put on a big case in litigation. I know this has happened to a few second or third year attorneys in our section. But overall, ATR does not litigate a lot, and when we do, it is large, complex cases, with very little court time.
So my second question is why you are looking specifically at ATR. Do you have an offer from ATR, but not from any other division within DOJ?

Yes, I would like to learn to litigate. Court time is far less important than motion practice, writing, etc.

And yes, I have an offer from ATR but not from any other divisions. When I was going through the process, I hadn't realized how little litigating the Division really does.

Oh, and I should add - I really like antitrust as a subject, but I don't think I want to do antitrust work at the expense of learning how to litigate so early in my career.

[Anonymous]

Have you applied directly to the USAO? They hire people of varying backgrounds. If you are smart, have the tools to be a good trial lawyer, and are committed to public service, they'll look at you, despite the absence of litigation experience.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I interviewed with one in TX through the HP but I haven't heard - I'm assuming I didn't get it.

[Anonymous]

To answer one of your questions above - I found it very easy to switch between divisions at DOJ, and I think a lot of people (assuming you have the grades/good work track record/can interview well) do it. Once you are in, you definitely have a leg up on outsiders applying for jobs with other divisions. I went from DOJ to USAO and then back to a different DOJ division. BTW one of the smartest/most successful people I knew at USAO had come from antitrust (had gone there first as an honors attorney).

[Anonymous]

I think switching between DOJ divisions is fairly common, given that several people have left my division to move to other divisions during the 4 years I have been here.

[Anonymous]

Question for AUSAs: Is it hard to lateral as a senior associate? I know someone who applied for a couple of AUSA positions in the last year with a sterling resume (top of class at USN top 14, appellate clerkship, prestigious firm with eye-popping work), but they didn't even get a call. While there could have been a dozen similar candidates with even better schools and clerkships, it still seems odd. The best explanation I could think of is that USAO avoids hires that would be GS-15-10s.

Any thoughts?

(The person landed at another agency BTW).

[Anonymous]

I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.

This is exactly right. I'm the AUSA on the hiring committee who posted above. We are inundated with resumes from amazingly qualified candidates. We have turned down more than one Supreme Court clerk in the last year.

GS scale does not play into it at all since USAOs are not on the GS scale. Anybody considering a job in the USAO should know that pay there is AD (administratively determined), meaning it is essentially up to the whims of the USA and First Assistant. In my office, nobody coming from outside the federal government starts above $90k. Nobody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.

This is exactly right. I'm the AUSA on the hiring committee who posted above. We are inundated with resumes from amazingly qualified candidates. We have turned down more than one Supreme Court clerk in the last year.

GS scale does not play into it at all since USAOs are not on the GS scale. Anybody considering a job in the USAO should know that pay there is AD (administratively determined), meaning it is essentially up to the whims of the USA and First Assistant. In my office, nobody coming from outside the federal government starts above $90k. Nobody.

Wow. You'd probably get fewer resumes if you publicized that.

[Anonymous]

Not sure about the ability to move to USAO portion of the question, but I do think Bill Baer would be a great person to work for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.

This is exactly right. I'm the AUSA on the hiring committee who posted above. We are inundated with resumes from amazingly qualified candidates. We have turned down more than one Supreme Court clerk in the last year.

GS scale does not play into it at all since USAOs are not on the GS scale. Anybody considering a job in the USAO should know that pay there is AD (administratively determined), meaning it is essentially up to the whims of the USA and First Assistant. In my office, nobody coming from outside the federal government starts above $90k. Nobody.

I'm the PP above. I'm going to tell this to my friend (who has a small chip on their shoulder about not getting a SCOTUS clerkship). It will make them feel better. Please tell me that some SCOTUS clerks don't even get a call.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.

This is exactly right. I'm the AUSA on the hiring committee who posted above. We are inundated with resumes from amazingly qualified candidates. We have turned down more than one Supreme Court clerk in the last year.

GS scale does not play into it at all since USAOs are not on the GS scale. Anybody considering a job in the USAO should know that pay there is AD (administratively determined), meaning it is essentially up to the whims of the USA and First Assistant. In my office, nobody coming from outside the federal government starts above $90k. Nobody.

Wow. You'd probably get fewer resumes if you publicized that.

Maybe. I'm not aware of anybody turning down the job offer once they found out the salary though. Merit based raises are pretty steady, but nobody's getting rich.

To the other PP, we did interview the SCOTUS clerks before rejecting them.

[Anonymous]

Question for the hiring committee AUSA above: what do you think about candidates coming from relevant Main Justice components (per my earlier question about perhaps switching from ATR to Tax or Crim after my 3 year commitment) relative to relevant firm practices? The firm I would join has a very strong WC group with 7-8 former AUSAs as partners.

How does the prior commitment to service play into it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Question for the hiring committee AUSA above: what do you think about candidates coming from relevant Main Justice components (per my earlier question about perhaps switching from ATR to Tax or Crim after my 3 year commitment) relative to relevant firm practices? The firm I would join has a very strong WC group with 7-8 former AUSAs as partners.

How does the prior commitment to service play into it?

y
Careful with assumptions about law firm experience. Every summer associate gets to WC work if they want to. But many take the bait, only to find themselves doing insurance litigation when they become associates. Standard bait and switch.

[Anonymous]

No, my offer is practice group specific. Most of the associates in the group also do a decent amount of CJA Panel work if that makes a difference.