We received this info last night, from several readers in attendance. One of them wrote:

For the patent nerds out there, including me, Chief Judge Paul R. Michel of the Federal Circuit is retiring effective May 31, 2010. Just personally announced it at the FCBA annual dinner. Sent his resignation letter to Obama this morning.

Why is Chief Judge Michel stepping down? Is it due to inadequate judicial pay?

Apparently not, according to our source:

[H]e said he’s motivated to retire instead of moving to senior judge status because he hates the muzzle that comes with being an Article III judge. He wants to lobby. He feels pretty strongly that certain parts of the pending patent reform act are outrageous.

Read more at Patently-O and the BLT (links below).

Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul Michel Announces that he is Leaving the Bench [Patently-O]
Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul Michel Announces Retirement [The BLT: Blog of the Legal Times]

Yesterday I had the quintessential New York City moment. At the bodega around the corner from Breaking Media’s lavish Nolita office, the bodega’s proprietor engaged me and two other people in a conversation involving three languages. I was speaking English, another guy was speaking Spanish, and I believe the third woman was speaking Portuguese, and the bodega owner was talking to all of us and translating where necessary.

I love this town!

I would have loved this conversation if we had been talking about dog poop. But instead the four of us were talking about a lawsuit that New Yorkers have been buzzing about all day. The cover story in yesterday’s Daily News involves a pretty lady (pictured) suing her co-op board:

Christina Ambers, once dubbed the “Heidi Klum of foot models,” says a romance with her porter-turned-husband, Angel Rotger, turned her into a pariah among workers at 340 E. 74th St., who made her hail taxis and retrieve packages on her own.

“I hope that people can understand how awful it is to come home and to then be treated with hostility in a building where I have paid a lot of money to live,” Ambers told the Daily News. “Nobody should have to live this way.”

Oh, to live on the Upper East Side — as I do — is to know the true definition of pettiness.

At the bodega, I made the mistake of telling my interlocutors that I “write a legal blog.” At that point, the bodega owner, the construction worker who speaks Spanish, and the Brazilian nanny had all kinds of legal questions.

Details about the suit and the street-level reaction, after the jump.

Californian bar takers are hoping to have something to be thankful for next Thursday. They get their bar exam results today at 6 p.m. PST.

Results are available to bar takers tonight and to the general public on Sunday at 6 a.m. PST.

Says one tipster who is not too confident:

California Bar Results come out at 6:00 pm pst today… counting down the hours until I found out I failed….

Releasing results on a Friday is a great idea. It means that the successful can live it up and the not-so-successful can drink themselves into a sad stupor. And everyone can sleep it off on Saturday morning.

Here’s an open thread for those who want a place to comment while chugging.

July 2009 California Bar Examination Pass List [State Bar of California]

* Tom Daschle is going to DLA as an advisor, not for help with his taxes. [USA Today]

* Deloitte pays to make Parmalat go away. [Going Concern]

* Indiana Law Professor proposes shipping at-risk kids back to Africa. Oh, where to begin? [True/Slant]

* Is perfectionism a blessing or a curse? [What About Clients?]

* If it’s good enough for Yale Law, then it should be good enough for New York Law School. [Adjunct Law Prof Blog]

* It’s holiday sale time in Biglaw. [Young Lawyers Blog]

* Brick Breaker prowess doesn’t always translate into firm success. But when it does, it is awesome. [Litination]

* The ATL running group will be meeting tomorrow (Saturday) at 10 a.m., at the East River 6th Street track. All are welcome. [Above the Law]

Ed. note: Welcome to ATL’s first foray into serial fiction. “My Job Is Murder,” a mystery set in a D.C. appellate boutique, will appear one chapter at a time, M-W-F, over the next few weeks. Prior installments appear here; please read them first.

Susanna Dokupil can be reached by email at sdokupil@sbcglobal.net or on Facebook.

Katarina grabbed her oversized purse and tossed a long red scarf around her neck. Tyler noticed a copy of Atlas Shrugged peeking out of it. Alignment: Libertarian. And geeky. Only true bookworms manage to slog through all 1000+-pages of Ayn Rand’s magnum opus.

“So what kind of law do you want to practice?” Tyler asked as they walked. He groaned inwardly for asking such a stock question.

“Litigation, probably appellate,” she replied. “I’m especially interested in constitutional questions.”

Tyler sensed a liberal arts background and good grades in law school. “And what was your college major?”

“Archaeology. I have my master’s degree in Near Eastern Art and Archaeology from the University of Chicago.”

Precisely, thought Tyler.

Ed. note: Have a question for next week? Send it in to advice@abovethelaw.com.

ATL,

“I’m a law student with a record. Larceny by trick, we’ll call it. It happened a while ago. I have reasonable assurances from bar members in my state and my law school that if I disclose and explain (and obviously, don’t mess up again) that I will pass the character & fitness exam.

But does it matter? When I got to law school, I thought I’d be able to get a job. Almost three years later, there are no jobs. Is there any point for a guy in my position to even apply to Biglaw firms? My grades are good enough to get Biglaw, but will they just ignore me because of my past?”

Been Caught Stealing

Dear Been Caught Stealing,

I always wondered what became of the cool rich kids from my high school who smashed in people’s mailboxes and raced away in their Jettas to funnel beer in their parents’ basements. If Facebook is to be believed, they’ve traded in terrorizing friendless ninth grade transfer students with clear braces and an unfortunate Sun-In situation for wildly successful careers and loving relationships. And evidently, some of them become lawyers.

I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again: the market for lawyers is a piece of garbage. But as long as you pass character and fitness, you’re in the same position as hordes of other unemployed recent grads. People usually don’t list “criminal” under their resume work experience; they wait until they’re filling out forms at the interview or they’re accepting the job to reveal their checkered past. It’s called “bait and switch,” which you’re probably familiar with. Because you’re a criminal. And that’s how you roll.

I think the world of Biglaw is closed to you for the moment. There is no reason that a swank firm would take someone with a record when they can easily get 300 other people without one to fill the spot. You’ll have better luck in smaller firms where the people are kinder and went to worse schools. Or try PI, where you’ll work amongst your brethren.

I hope this helps.

Your friend,

Marin

Are you sick of taking phone calls at 4:30 on Friday? Would you rather be the one making the phone calls? If so, this Job of the Week might be for you. As always the Job of the Week is brought to you by Lateral Link. Today’s job is another position with one of Lateral Link’s in-house clients. Over the last 4 months Lateral Link has placed more than a dozen attorneys in in-house positions throughout the United States.

Position: Vice President

Location: Orange County, CA

Description: With more than $750 billion of assets under management, and offices around the globe, this Investment Management company is one of the world’s foremost bond fund managers, overseeing more than 70 mutual funds invested in such financial instruments as corporate paper, emerging markets debt, municipal bonds, mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps, and real estate investment trusts (REITs), as well as stocks. The company is seeking a Vice President, Attorney with a minimum of three to six years of experience in securities laws applicable to registered investment advisers, including the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The successful candidate will have the opportunity to work on cutting edge legal and regulatory matters, such as analyzing compliance and trading issues, drafting and reviewing compliance policies, negotiating agreements, including investment management agreements, participating in special projects, such as regulatory audits, litigation matters and general corporate work, and resolving legal issues in connection with expansion of its business model and development of new products.

If you are a candidate, please see Position #5567 on Lateral Link. If you are not a member you can sign up for free at www.laterallink.com. If you are an employer seeking top legal talent for your company, please contact Michael Allen, Principal of Lateral Link, at mallen@laterallink.com or 213.785.2344.

The bonus news is coming fast and furious today. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett is trying to nail down the market at the Cravath level. Multiple tipsters sent in the STB bonus announcement and the firm is following Cravath at all class levels.

Regular Above the Law readers will note that there is absolutely no surprise about Simpson’s bonus. Last year at around this time — when there was still a clear separation between Skadden’s bonus and Cravath’s bonus — Simpson rushed in to follow Cravath.

Given that history, we don’t know a lot of people that expected Simpson to do anything other than follow Cravath. Long gone are the days when Simpson led the charge to $160K.

But don’t forget about Sullivan & Cromwell. The firm’s had a good year, and with all of its competitors falling in line behind Cravath, they could get some real market separation here with a bonus that is still smaller than what they paid out last year.

What a fun Friday. I wonder if anybody else will rush out a bonus announcement before five o’clock? I’m going to need another Red Bull.

Read the STB bonus memo, after the jump.

Seyfarth Shaw is set to become the latest firm to flip its incoming associates the Bird. A very angry tipster reports:

[Seyfarth] just deferred all incoming associates to October 2010 with only $2000/month as a stipend beginning on our former start date of January 19, 2010! It’s a joke … we know for a fact that they were busy and could have afforded us. It is a firm managed by horrible, greedy, selfish individuals … This is amusing, in light of the fact that the firm turned a profit last year …

We would like to warn anyone considering accepting an offer from the firm to STAY AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is particularly disconcerting for those of us who turned down offers from Biglaw in favor of a firm that apparently “cared soooo much” about us. Go Vault or go home.

Whoa, tell us what you really think. You have to wonder if these deferred incoming associates will come up with any fun banners about their would-be employer.

As angry as the deferred incoming associates appear to be, it is not at all clear that Seyfarth could have afforded to bring on a new class of people at this time. In addition to telling the incoming associates to wait for almost another year, today the firm announced that it was cutting first year associate salaries.

Details and a statement from Seyfarth, after the jump.

Earlier this month, we asked you if holiday parties were still on this year. Many people said that they were, albeit more subdued than the halcyon days of yore.

But one deferred associate had this question:

Aside from the question of which firms may be abandoning their holiday parties this year, it would be interesting to see which firms are inviting their deferred associates. As of now I don’t think the firm that deferred me is …

You know, it never occurred to me that firms would invite deferred associates the holiday party. At first blush, the idea sounds ludicrous. Why would they invite people who are not employees to the employee party?

I’m willing to bet that it never occurred to most firms either. But remember, deferring incoming associates is a completely new thing. There are no rules for this stuff; the legal industry is making it up as it goes along.

So, as long as we are setting new standards here, why shouldn’t a firm invite deferred associates to the party?

A discussion and a reader poll after the jump.