One more DOJ topic - DOJ Antitrust

[Anonymous]

To be fair, not all of the "WC" work is criminal work - I could end up doing a lot of FINRA, CFTC, etc. investigations.

[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?

AUSA again. If you have trial experience coming from a DOJ component that is a huge plus, more so than getting bonus points for commitment to service. That said, if you are at a firm with a strong WC practice with lots of former AUSA partners and you avail yourself of the opportunity to do CJA work on the side, that sounds like a good potential stepping stone to the USAO as well.

[Anonymous]

Thank you. Would the 6 month USAO detail within ATR be enough for the trial experience, or is the nature of the antitrust work so different that I would actually need to switch to a different component at some point before making the jump?

[Anonymous]

The six month detail in EDVA is doing their federal lands misdemeanor docket. It's not going to be impressive experience. Honestly, between ATR and your firm, I would take the firm job. Make some money now and then apply to a DOJ lit component in a couple of years. With your credentials and a few trials under your belt, you'll be a competitive USAO candidate.

[Anonymous]

Done. Thanks for the advice.

[Anonymous]

I am one of the PP who works in ATR. I am glad you were able to make a decision. I personally think the Division is a fantastic place to work with good camaraderie and great intellectual challenge. But, it doesn't really sound like the right place for you. Good luck in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am one of the PP who works in ATR. I am glad you were able to make a decision. I personally think the Division is a fantastic place to work with good camaraderie and great intellectual challenge. But, it doesn't really sound like the right place for you. Good luck in the future.

Thank you. If only merger cases were litigated on a more regular basis I'd go there in a heartbeat!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Right, the vast majority of people applying know the salary ahead of time. I heard that salary does playing into experienced lawyers from firms not being called; USAO would have to pay someone fresh out of law school/clerking very much and to the USAO, a law firm associate and recent grad are pretty similar.