<p>Getting back to the OP, I answered a similar question in the thread on IP law:
[quote]
Some law schools have specialized IP classes, but it depends on which areas of IP you're speaking about. Some examples are Georgetown, John Marshall, UC Berkeley (Boalt), Hastings, Cardozo, Franklin Pierce. </p>
<p>It always helps to have more qualifications than the next applicants for a position, so taking IP classes, if they are available, at least shows your interest in the subject. However, hiring attorneys have different assessments of the real value of such courses in working in an IP area, usually ranging from not much to some, also depending on the schools. If IP courses aren't available in the school, look for any courses or law reviews on combinations of law and technology. </p>
<p>More schools are giving more courses in IP due to increased interest among attorneys and students.</p>
<p>In my opinion, if you are interested in IP, sure, look for the best school you can afford and be admitted to that has some IP courses, but you also need to look at schools in certain geographical ares in which you want to practice. For instance, if you want to practice in the Southeast, it may be better to attend one of the better schools in that area that has a good alumni network than to attend an out-of-area school with good IP courses.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In general, as long as you go to a reasonably good law school and do well there, you need not go to a tier1 school to succeed in IP law, especially if you want to practice patent law where, as Greybeard wtote, your technical education and overall qualifications are at least as important if not more so.</p>
<p>As a specific example, here in the Bay area employers will generally regard Hastings and Santa Clara law schools as more or less in the same level, so that if you attend and do well in either you will be pretty well qualified for a good position. Do poorly in one of these, however, and you will not be very competitive overall.</p>