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.

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?

Anonymous wrote:Thank you all for the replies.

I say that I would almost certainly not make partner because my firm makes very few litigation partners -- except for those that have left to become AUSAs (or gone other government posts) and returned. See my dilemma?
My fear is that I would have a lot of difficulty transitioning into government at some later date. While I was there over the summer, many of the associates - all with credentials at least as good as my own - were fighting tooth and nail to get into USAOs, DOJ, SEC, etc.

For those of you within the DOJ, how hard is it to switch within divisions? For example, would I be better off doing my 3 year ATR commitment, trying to move to Tax or Crim, and then trying to move to a USAO? That would put me at about 6 - 7 years out of law school before I moved over, which seems to be about the average tenure in private practice as well.

Sorry, I mean between divisions.

Thank you all for the replies.

I say that I would almost certainly not make partner because my firm makes very few litigation partners -- except for those that have left to become AUSAs (or gone other government posts) and returned. See my dilemma?
My fear is that I would have a lot of difficulty transitioning into government at some later date. While I was there over the summer, many of the associates - all with credentials at least as good as my own - were fighting tooth and nail to get into USAOs, DOJ, SEC, etc.

For those of you within the DOJ, how hard is it to switch within divisions? For example, would I be better off doing my 3 year ATR commitment, trying to move to Tax or Crim, and then trying to move to a USAO? That would put me at about 6 - 7 years out of law school before I moved over, which seems to be about the average tenure in private practice as well.

Anonymous wrote:You sound like a law firm person. If you can countenance not being able to spend that much time with your kids, then I don't see any reason for you to detour through DOJ. Otoh, you are still very young and you have 6 or 7 years before you really need to start trying for kids. That's plenty of time to save up money and figure out a way to reduce your work hours. Small firm ("boutique") is a great idea for transitioning out of big law, especially if you do do a few ausa years.

Not a bad point. If you like firm life, even a smaller or boutique firm, you can make a pile of money now before you have kids. In just 3-4 years you could pay off loans if you have them, and/or finance a house, save for future kids, etc. You won't be doing that at the government -- certainly not at a USAO -- or at least not at nearly the same rate as you could do at a firm.

Just curious -- why do you say you almost certainly wouldn't make partner?

You sound like a law firm person. If you can countenance not being able to spend that much time with your kids, then I don't see any reason for you to detour through DOJ. Otoh, you are still very young and you have 6 or 7 years before you really need to start trying for kids. That's plenty of time to save up money and figure out a way to reduce your work hours. Small firm ("boutique") is a great idea for transitioning out of big law, especially if you do do a few ausa years.

Anonymous wrote:I work in the Antitrust Division. We have a young attorney leaving to go to private practice because he needs the money. I don't know the details, but he was able to find a firm job in this economy. OTOH, we have had hiring freezes off and on over the past five years. The few times we have done lateral hiring, we are flooded with resumes from very highly qualified people, including biglaw partners. So, in my limited experience (I have been at ATR for many years, so have not been in the job market myself), it is easier to leave the Antitrust Division for private practice than it is to get in to the Division as a lateral.

+1 -- I also work at ATR (been here 10+ years) and the above post is accurate. I also think what the AUSA posted is probably accurate too, if that is your ultimate goal. No wide range of WC work here, just ATR. FWIW, I have found ATR to be a fairly family-friendly place to work, if that weighs into your decision.

ATR has very few cases, let alone trials-- they are rare. So a lot of your work is discovery-type stuff (doc review, subpoenas, depositions). You are very unlikely to end up doing motions practice or trials.

I am an AUSA and on my office's hiring committee. No offense to people at ATR, but it is probably one of the DOJ components that is least likely to lead to a job in the USAO because the skills you would learn at ATR are largely inapplicable to the work AUSAs do. If USAO is your ultimate goal, you're probably better off doing WC defense and internal investigations at a firm, particularly if you make sure to do some pro bono work that gets you into court.

I apologize for the lack of clarity in my responses. I should be asleep!

Anonymous wrote:Thank you. Is the lack of litigation experience a problem?

Do you mean is lack of litigation experience make it hard to get a law firm job? If so, it probably depends. We do a lot of discovery sort of work, so if a lawyer left in the first couple of years, he or she is not really far behind a litigation associate at a firm, and perhaps ahead. It is more likely that a second year at ATR will do a deposition than it is a second year at a firm will. But, I think attorneys who leave ATR are often not looking for litigation in their new positions, so a lack of litigation experience is not necessarily an issue.

Thank you. Is the lack of litigation experience a problem?

I work in the Antitrust Division. We have a young attorney leaving to go to private practice because he needs the money. I don't know the details, but he was able to find a firm job in this economy. OTOH, we have had hiring freezes off and on over the past five years. The few times we have done lateral hiring, we are flooded with resumes from very highly qualified people, including biglaw partners. So, in my limited experience (I have been at ATR for many years, so have not been in the job market myself), it is easier to leave the Antitrust Division for private practice than it is to get in to the Division as a lateral.

I stumbled upon the past few threads discussing DOJ positions. I thought they were very helpful and was hoping to once again get the board's insight into legal hiring.

Here is my decision: I can either go to the Antitrust Division through the Honors Program or back to a very good firm. This is not a case where I was not happy with the prestige of my firm and want to "trade up" or anything - I saw this scenario referenced in a previous DOJ post. However, I recognize that I almost certainly would not make partner and would probably need to look for another firm or government job in 5 - 6 years.

I went to HYS. I clerked for a district court, but nothing that would stand out as impressive in the legal community.

The main reason I chose the firm was for its deep connections to the USAO in its city. I think that the USAO remains the goal, but I'm also not sure that I want to be in public service for my entire career. I also find some of the boutique litigation firms (which I understand pay substantially below biglaw at partner levels) to be very attractive places to practice. I have no desire to practice a big national firm long-term and I am sure this will not change.

I enjoy antitrust work but would not want to stay at the Antitrust Division forever, or even long enough to get to leadership level there.

My wife and I are planning to have children within the next 3-5 years. We are both quite young still - I am 25 and she is 24. She is (within reason) willing to move around to accommodate my career goals, but she also has her own career that we will need to think about before any major relocation decisions.

I had always assumed that if my situation changes and I feel as though I need money sometime in the next 5 years, I would be able to find a firm job that I liked well enough. Previous posts seem to call this into question. Any thoughts?