America-Israel Patent Law Blog

Recently the following advertisement was posted on one of the English-language “help wanted” bulletin boards in Israel.  I’ve decided to spare the guilty parties further embarrassment and redacted their names:

Patent Attorney Intern Needed

We are looking for a patent attorney intern.

XYZ is a mid-size UK-Israeli firm with a fun atmosphere. We draft and prosecute patent applications for fortune 500 companies and universities, and we need help.

Relevent fields are software, electornics, and electro-optics.

We are looking for candidates who are after a career at the patent industry and therefore, candidates should be willing to work hard for an intern wage in order to get good training.

English should be at native-tongue level. Candidates will be expected to write a short paper to prove their English level.

Please send CVs by email only to XXX@__.com. Thank you!

Well, if this advertisement is any indication of the quality of their patent applications, then yes, they most certainly need some help!  So in the interest of collegiality, I offer a few suggestions for how the members of this firm might ensure that they identify the best candidate.

They should begin by asking candidates to spell “relevant” and “electronics”.  Inasmuch as their web site also contains the statement that “Israeli PTO circulars will become affective 3 months after publication on the PTO’s website”, they should probably ask candidates to write essays that use both “affective” and “effective”. 

Similarly, candidates should be asked to explain the meaning of the term “conflicating”, which appears in the following sentence on the firm’s website: “We are pleased to try to help conflicating parties resolve their conflicts in peaceful manners, as an alternative to litigation proceedings.”  (The paragraph goes on to conclude, “Our managing partner is well-known for his mediation skills.”  As well as his gift for lexicographical creativity, no doubt.)

The partners should also ask candidates to explain the difference between “[being] after a career at the patent industry” versus “seeking a career in the patent industry”.  For that matter, they should ask candidates to explain the differences between the patent industry and the field of patent law and practice.  I’m not sure I know myself – I haven’t yet seen a patent factory, but then there are many parts of the world I haven’t visited.

In addition, candidates should be asked to identify at least two errors in following sentence, taken from the firm’s web site:  “Our double-check procedure makes sure that many professional and experienced eyes review each application before it leaves the office to make sure that it describes the invention well, as broad as reasonably possible, and design to fly through the examiners as easily as possible.”

In any case, full credit to this firm for its adherence to truth-in-advertising strictures.  Not everyone would be so bold as to tell job candidates of whom perfect English is demanded that they should be prepared to work long hours for low wages, for professionals whose own English skills are wanting.  Low pay and a boss you don’t respect – that’s always a winning combination.  I’m sure many excellent candidates have already beaten a path to this firm’s door.