The Supreme Court decided it wants no part of the Redskins case, and Quinn remains victorious over Native American activists who want to change the team’s racially charged moniker. The WSJ Law blog reports:

The Redskins on Monday got a bit of good news from the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined cert filed by Native American activists who claim the Redskins’ team name is so offensive that it does not deserve trademark protection. The ruling essentially lets stand a lower court ruling that the activists waited too long to bring the challenge.

Mmmm … laches.

Regular Above the Law readers know that this case sparked some internal controversy at Quinn Emanuel when a then-associate at the firm took offense to Robert Raskopf’s celebratory lower court victory email.

The associate argued that Quinn was on the wrong side of history, but it appears the firm is on the right side of the law.

Back in May, Drinker Biddle came up with a radically different program for first years. For the first six months, first years at Drinker are more like apprentices than traditional first years. They get intensive training, but are only paid $105,000.

Despite those changes, the firm has still decided to lay off attorneys. Multiple tipsters report that 22 Drinker Biddle associates were laid off yesterday.

Drinker Biddle spokespeople did not comment about the news. But tipsters report that the significant cut to first year salary did not end up saving the jobs of more senior associates.

Details on departments and offices and an update after the jump.

Who can forget Quinn Emanuel’s victory in the 17-year-long dispute over the name “Redskins”? Above the Law readers will remember Robert Raskopf’s happy victory email … and the first-year associate who had a problem with the firm’s representation of the Washington Football club. The first year was (eek!) fired for reasons unrelated to his disagreement with the firm’s position.

But is the firm’s position as strong as Raskopf thought? The Blog of the Legal Times reports that the Redskins case has made it all the way to the Supreme Court:

The long-running dispute over the appropriateness of the “Redskins” name for the Washington D.C. NFL football franchise reached the Supreme Court today. Philip Mause, partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath in D.C., representing a group of Native Americans offended by the name, filed a petition for certiorari in the case titled Susan Harjo v. Pro-Football, Inc.

Was Raskopf’s victory email premature? More details, plus an UPDATE about the Native Americans’ game plan if SCOTUS doesn’t want to play, after the jump.

We have reported extensively on the difficult offer situation for people who summered at Philadelphia area firms in 2009. Morgan Lewis & Bockius had an offer rate below 28%. Pepper Hamilton offered about 63% of its summers. Dechert told half of its summers that the firm would wait until January to make a decision offers, yet continues to interview 3Ls this recruiting season.

Let’s close the loop on the Philadelphia market with two other well known firms: Drinker Biddle and Cozen O’Connor. The Legal Intelligencer reports that Drinker Biddle did slightly better than its area competition:

The firm gave offers to about 68 percent, or 25, of the 37 2L summer associates it had firmwide in 2009. The offer rate was about the same in Philadelphia, where 13 of the 19 2Ls received offers, the firm confirmed.

After the jump, Drinker Biddle chairman, Alfy Putnam, explains the firm’s decision.

First years to 100K and an “apprenticeship”?

In the past two months, we’ve reported on three firms instituting an apprenticeship model for first year associates: Drinker Biddle, Howrey, and Frost Brown Todd. “Apprentices” start at the firm at a lower salary and are not billed out to clients, billed out at a lower rate than normal associates, or billed out for lower total hours. It sounds like an apprentice is a “paralegal plus.” Of course, that “plus” includes a J.D. and its accompanying law school debt.

Still, when we polled you last week, almost 70% of ATL readers who voted said they were in favor of Howrey’s $100K-plus-professional-training apprenticeship.

The National Law Journal (subscription) has an extensive piece on apprenticeships (noting two other firms that have instituted the practice — labor firm Ford & Harri­son and Dallas’s Strasburger & Price):

These firms are putting new recruits through additional apprenticeship programs that they say will better train their attorneys for life at a law firm and for handling clients. Think of it as the equivalent of a medical residency, only with suits instead of scrubs.

The latest — and so far largest — firm to move to an apprenticeship model, 659-lawyer Howrey, announced its program last week. Starting next year, first-years at the firm will get a pay cut — from $160,000 to $100,000 in base pay plus a $25,000 bonus to pay down law school loans — and they’ll spend a good portion of their time attending classes with partners and shadowing them on client matters. The apprenticeship period will last two years.

Are law students really like medical students, in need of on-the-job training in order to operate in the real world? If apprenticeships become widespread — which admittedly seems unlikely once the tough economic times are behind us — should the training at a firm mean one less year in law school? Firm salaries are going down, but law school tuition is going up. Maybe it’s time to rebalance.

A round-up of the salaries for BigLaw apprentices, and a poll on how law schools should be reacting to deflating salaries, after the jump.

Sorry to go all caps on you. But we finally have a firm that is using the crisis to seriously rethink the nature of the first year experience, instead of just firing them, deferring them, cutting their salaries, or generally acting like first years are solely responsible for ruining the Biglaw model with their entitled insistence on being employed after three years of legal education.

The Legal Intelligencer and AmLaw Daily reports that Drinker Biddle will actually allow first years to start in September:

Rather than immediately assign the incoming lawyers to client matters, the firm will enroll its hires in a new training program that will provide courses on taking depositions, writing briefs, and meeting client needs. The instructors will include Drinker attorneys, professional development staff, and firm clients. The 37 first years also will shadow partners’ client meetings and court appearances. The associates may handle some client work, but at significantly reduced rates.

There is a catch. For the first six months, first years will be paid on a scale of $105,000. That is a bigger reduction in salaries than we’ve seen at other firms. On the other hand, Drinker Biddle is also reducing the rates that clients are charged for first year work.

Anybody else notice that responding to client concerns about the value of first year attorneys by reducing billing rates makes intuitive sense? I think Drinker Biddle management would do very, very well on the LSAT.

After the jump, we see that Drinker is rethinking the entire first year experience.

We hope you enjoyed last week, a “relatively quiet week” in layoffs. We’ll see if the relative calm holds as we get closer to the time for firms to make another payroll.

Last night, the Legal Intelligencer broke the news that Wolf Block could be doing a lot more (subscription) than laying off employees this week:

Several sources have said members of the executive committee met Saturday to discuss a possible dissolution of the firm. The matter is said to be set for a full partnership vote as early as Monday. A decision to dissolve the firm would need to be approved by at least 75 percent of the partnership, one source said.

After the jump, the now familiar story of failed mergers as precursors to dissolution.

We received multiple reports this morning that Drinker Biddle & Reath let go of approximately 20 people, all on Friday. Tipsters reported the information this morning, but a morning commenter had the best line:

Yes it’s true about DBR - on Friday afternoon. No stealth - they came around to every office - told everyone it was economy based.

Other tipsters confirmed that the dismissals were based on the economy and not associate performance. The firm would not confirm or deny the reports, as a matter of policy.

If true, axing people 13 days before Christmas is a sad sign of the times. Let’s hope that firms finish all of their 2008 associate cuts by the end of this week. Surely feelings and families should take precedence over burying layoff news in the holiday news cycle.

And, as always, good luck to all the former Drinker Biddle employees.

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of law firm layoffs

Gracing the front page of today’s Washington Post is an article that will appeal to many ATL readers. It’s by Post reporter Ian Shapira, who previously wrote this interesting piece about summer associates. Here’s the headline:

Okay, not a terribly novel development. As one of several ATL readers who wrote us about this story observed, “it’s not exactly Man Bites Dog.”

But even if the article may not be earth-shattering, it’s a well-crafted, thought-provoking piece. We think it will get an interesting discussion going. Also, anything that gets a general audience to care about the niche topic of law firms, like a front page WaPo article, is a good thing in our book.

Excerpts and observations, after the jump.

We’ve previously covered Denver and Hartford. Today our series of posts profiling associate compensation in various smaller legal markets — smaller than New York or Washington or Los Angeles, at least — turns to Philadelphia.

What’s going on in the City of Brotherly Love? Based on some recent articles we’ve read, it seems that the standard starting salary in Philly hovers between $135,000 and $145,000.

At $135K: Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis; Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll; Duane Morris; Blank Rome; Wolf, Block, Schorr & Solis-Cohen; and DLA Piper.

At $145K: Morgan, Lewis & Bockius; Dechert; Drinker Biddle & Reath; and Pepper Hamilton.

Will Philly move to the $160K scale anytime soon? If so, when? And who will lead the charge?

In the cheesesteak metropolis, starting salaries aren’t the only issue. Per a commenter:

[W]hen you do [Philadelphia], please make sure to point out our mid-level comp which sucks. We get about a 5k raise per year (though [in] some years we do get 10k but not most). After 7 years we’re just clearing 200k.

Interesting — and depressing. Is so-called “compression” higher up the seniority ladder a more pressing salary issue in Philly right now than the state of starting salaries?

Please discuss, in the comments. Thanks.

Hangley Aronchick Raises Associate Salaries to $135,000 [Legal Intelligencer (subscription)]
Pepper Hamilton Raising First-Year Associates’ Salaries by $20,000 [Legal Intelligencer (subscription)]

Soon we’ll be all caught up in Legal Eagle Wedding Watch. Here are the three couples for the weekend of December 23-24, 2006:

1. Kathryn Connor, John Ridley Jr.

2. Ilyse Langer, Steve Metzger

3. Nancy Montgomery, Leonard Lombard

Discussion of these couples appears after the jump.

It has been a while since our last round-up of notable moves within the legal profession. So there’s a lot to report today:

Law Firm to… Prison?

* Former Milberg Weiss name partner Steven Schulman resigned from the firm to pursue “new ventures.” The most important of these “ventures” will surely be fighting federal charges of making illegal payments to plaintiffs in past cases.

Law Firms to In-House:

* Securities lawyer Stephen Cutler is leaving his partnership at WilmerHale to become general counsel of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the banking giant. From a tipster who works in securities law: “This is a big deal.”

Colleagues of Cutler described the JP Morgan gig to the WSJ Law Blog as a “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity. Translation: Who wouldn’t want to make mid- instead of low-seven-figures?

* Another WilmerHale departure: J. Kevin McCarthy is taking over as top lawyer of the Cowen Group, an investment bank.

Government to Private Sector:

* Former New Jersey Chief Justice Deborah Poritz joins the Princeton office of Drinker Biddle & Reath, as of counsel. She stepped down from the New Jersey Supreme Court in October, after reaching the mandatory retirement age.

Government Promotion:

* David Nocenti, current counsel to New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, will become counsel to the governor effective January 1.

Academia-Biglaw Alliance:

* Harvard Law School Professor Laurence Tribe, the renowned constitutional scholar and SCOTUS litigator, is entering into a consulting arrangement with Akin Gump.

Akin Gump is developing a Supreme Court practice. Earlier this year, they added young SCOTUS superstar Tom Goldstein to their line-up.

Lateral Moves:

* Securities-enforcement lawyer Chuck Davidow, to Paul Weiss (DC), from WilmerHale.

Another loss for WilmerHale — on top of the previously reported departure of Paul Eckert for the White House Counsel’s Office.

Why are so many partners leaving WilmerHale? A Hillary Clinton administration is still two years away.

* IP lawyer Joseph Gioconda, to DLA Piper (New York), from Kirkland & Ellis.

* Corporate lawyer Eric Lerner, to Kramer Levin, from Katten Muchin Rosenman.

* Tax lawyer Thomas Giegerich, to McDermott Will & Emery (NY), from Dewey Ballantine (about to merge with Orrick to form Dewy Orifice).

New Partners:

* Bryan Cave: Eleven new partners. Names here.

Due to the sheer number of links today, we’ve placed them after the jump.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in the case of KSR International v. Teleflex. Here’s our quick-and-dirty summary of the proceedings.

Subject Matter / Question Presented: To qualify for patent protection, an invention must be novel, useful, and not “obvious” to a person of “ordinary skill” in the field. So how do you determine “obviousness” when you have an invention that combines already-existing products? And is the Federal Circuit’s three-part “teaching-suggestion-motivation” test for obviousness a bunch of moronic nonsense?

Money Quote(s):

From the NYT:

When [veteran SCOTUS litigator Tom] Goldstein noted that “every single major patent bar association in the country has filed on our side,” the chief justice interjected: “Well, which way does that cut? That just indicates that this is profitable for the patent bar.” And when Mr. Goldstein referred to experts who had testified that the Teleflex patent was not obvious, the chief justice asked: “Who do you get to be an expert to tell you something’s not obvious? I mean, the least insightful person you can find?”

From the Legal Times:

“Three imponderable nouns,” is how Justice Antonin Scalia dismissed the test, also calling it “gobbledygook” for good measure.

Likely Outcome: The Federal Circuit will probably get benchslapped by the SCOTUS. As Tony Mauro notes:

[W]hen Justice Stephen Breyer said he had read the briefs in the case “15 times” and still could not understand the “motivation” prong of the test, Scalia chimed in, “Like Justice Breyer, I don’t understand.”

The implied message to the Federal Circuit seemed to be: If two of the brainier justices on the Supreme Court don’t have a clue what you are talking about, a new test might be in order.

For those of you looking for a substantive, eyewitness account of the argument, we reprint below the report of Joseph (Jay) R. DelMaster, Jr., a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath in Washington. His account includes advice about how to proceed in patent prosecutions while we await the Supreme Court’s decision.

Check it out, after the jump.

Law Firm Mergers:

Actually, they’re really acquisitions:

* Washington-based Crowell & Moring is building up its New York office by acquiring King Pagano Harrison, the health care/labor-and-employment boutique, and by picking up partners from IP boutique Morgan & Finnegan.

* Philadelphia-based Drinker Biddle & Reath is “merging” with Chicago-based Gardner Carton & Douglas. The new entity will keep the Drinker Biddle name and will be chaired by Drinker Biddle’s current chairman, Alfred W. Putnam Jr.

(Translation: Gardner Carton = Drinker Biddle’s beeatch.)

Out the Door:

* Casualties of the options backdating scandal: Bruce Karatz, CEO of KB Home (and a lawyer by training), and Richard Hirst, KB Home’s chief legal officer.

Crowell & Moring Acquires 20 Lawyers From Litigation Boutique [Legal Times via Law.com]
Firm Boosts NY Office With Boutique Acquisition, Raid [NYLawyer.com]
Firms Merge [NYLawyer.com]
Backdating Scandal Fells Top Homebuilding CEO [WSJ Law Blog]