Winston & Strawn is expanding with the help of Heller refugees. A tipster reports on the latest internal Winston communication:

[We] are extremely pleased to announce that the firm has added a number of former Heller Ehrman attorneys who will greatly enhance Winston's practices and international presence. Winston has acquired three partners in Hong Kong from Heller and Heller's international trade group in D.C. In addition, we welcome Joe Armao, a well-known environmental litigator, as a partner in our San Francisco office.

In Hong Kong, we are joined by capital markets and M&A partners Simon Luk and Michael Phillips and commercial litigation partner David Hall-Jones. Subject to local regulations*, these partners will be supported by additional associates and other professionals. Winston is also pursuing and fully expects to expand its presence in Asia with one or more offices in mainland China, likely to be in Shanghai and Beijing. We have begun the application process for this expansion. More details will follow as they become available.

In Washington, we have added four high-profile international trade partners: William Barringer, Daniel Porter, Christopher Dunn and James Durling, as well as associates Valerie Ellis, Matthew McCullough, Yu Li, and Ross Bidlingmaier. The international trade group will be supported by a number of non-lawyer trade professionals on the ground in Beijing.

Core practices primarily affected include complex commercial litigation, international arbitration and cross border deal-making capabilities. The firm has expanded materially in 2008 with the opening of the Charlotte office in January, the addition of prominent lateral attorneys to our existing offices and practices throughout the year, and this most recent expansion to Asia.

A press release will be available tomorrow morning on winston.com. An office page for our new Hong Kong location will be posted as well and will include address information and profiles of our new group.

We expect to take over existing Heller office space only as necessary. A full integration effort is underway; please take a moment to welcome our new team.

Regular readers of ATL will not be surprised by Winston capturing some top Heller talent.

Recent history after the jump.

If any Heller Ehrman attorneys were hoping that a major firm would sweep in and hire a whole bunch of Hellerites, the Dissolution Committee is warning you not to hold your breath. The Recorder reports:

On Tuesday, Peter Benvenutti, the chairman of the dissolution committee now controlling the firm, confirmed whispers that Baker & McKenzie and Winston & Strawn, both one-time merger candidates, had withdrawn proposals to pick up large groups of lawyers and their expensive real estate. While Benvenutti would not say whether deals on this scale are being discussed with any other firms, he did say there's interest in taking over certain of the firm's leases, and "we expect to have clarity in a day or two."

At this point, why would Baker or Winston Strawn take on expensive lawyers when they can just sit back and cherry pick the superstars they want? We haven't heard any story of a Heller rainmaker saying "If I come, these 30 people are coming with me."

More bad news after the jump.

As we mentioned earlier today, we're doing a series of posts on law firms no-offering their summer associates. Recently we heard this, from an operative in a law school career services office:

The first blow of what we expect to be a horrible recruiting season has landed. Winston & Strawn in Chicago was "oversubscribed" and is handing out no-offers and soft offers.

We contacted the firm for comment. From spokesperson Darryl Van Duch:

I am responding on behalf of firm management regarding your inquiry about Winston's summer class. In your email you stated that Winston & Strawn in Chicago is oversubscribed, and is handing out no-offers and cold offers.

It is the firm's policy to not comment on individual personnel issues or hiring issues. However, we felt in this situation it was appropriate to address your statements. As to the issue of cold offers, we have not made and will not make so-called 'cold' offers. Additionally, the overall percentage rate of offers we made to summer associates in the firm this year was in the 90s, consistent with prior years.

What we've been hearing is roughly consistent with Van Duch's statement. Tipsters tell us that the firm's Chicago office no-offered 7 out of 67 summer associates, meaning that 90 percent of summers did receive offers.

Now, 90 percent seems plenty high. But it's certainly lower than the 95 to 100 percent offer rates that were par for the Biglaw course during recent boom times. According to the NALP directory, the Chicago office of Winston had an offer rate of 100 percent in 2007, with 37 out of 37 summers getting offers.

More ruminations on offer rates, after the jump.

Welcome to another post in the 2009 Vault 100 open thread series. You all seem to like having the law firms listed in groups of ten, so we'll keep it up. Here are the thirty-something firms from the Vault 100, with prestige scores in parentheses:

31. Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP (6.461)
32. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP (6.327)
33. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (6.313)
34. Winston & Strawn LLP (6.275)
35. Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges LLP (6.235)
36. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP (6.174)
37. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe (6.173)
38. Allen & Overy LLP (6.147)
39. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft (6.131)
40. Proskauer Rose LLP (6.102)

Fried Frank and Cadwalader have been on the ATL radar of late. We broke news of staff layoffs at Fried Frank earlier this week, and news of the attorney bloodletting at Cadwalader last month. As noted in Cadwalader's notable perks: "ouch, layoffs." (Speaking of, in going through the Vault 100 list, we've discovered that Vault's definition of "perk" is very different from ours.)

In the comments, the curious can pose questions, and the insiders can share insights. More threads to come.

Earlier: Vault 100 Open Threads - 2009

Two pieces of good news from Winston & Strawn. First, like many other leading law firms, they've raised their maternity leave to 18 weeks (from 12 weeks). To see where your firm stands, check out our maternity leave table, continuously updated by surveys guru Justin Bernold.

Second, for all of you iPhone-atics out there:

You guys might be interested in this little tidbit. Beginning August 1st (provided there are no issues with compatibility or supply), Winston & Strawn will include the iPhone as part of its supported mobile devices. Last summer, Winston announced it would start purchasing BlackBerry devices for attorneys on a 2 year replacement cycle (prior to that time, attorneys were required to purchase their own devices but the firm reimbursed for data charges).

As noted in the announcement below, the Apple iPhone will now be among the supported devices, and the firm is even willing to purchase it for eligible attorneys (i.e., if you are not subject to a 2 year contract). For those attorneys who want the 16GB model, the firm will pay the first $200 (representing the cost for the 8GB model) and charge back the $100 additional cost to the attorney's personal account.

Check out the full announcement -- plus a handy chart comparing the iPhone with the Blackberry 8100, Blackberry 8800, and Blackberry 8830 -- after the jump.

There are vague rumors of something afoot at Heller Ehrman. Could the persistent gossip about a merger finally come true? Last week brought this report from TheLawyer.com:

The chairman of US firm Heller Ehrman has refused to rule out a merger after respected litigator Paul Alexander became the seventeenth partner to leave the firm this year. The firm lost 25 partners in 2007 and has lost 17 this year after Alexander quit to join Howrey in Palo Alto. [Ed. note: See links collected at the end of this post for more coverage of partner departures.]

Heller chairman Matt Larrabee told The Lawyer that a merger was one of the options his firm was considering, but maintained that no decision had been taken at this point in time....

The rumour mill has put Heller in talks with a number of firms and Larrabee's refusal to deny that Heller is currently in merger talks will only add to the widely held belief that the firm is nearing a deal.

But it won't be the previously rumored merger with Winston & Strawn, which Heller sources tell us is history. Another possible suitor: Proskauer Rose, which emerged in speculation last month. One Heller tipster likes the idea, noting good geographical fit -- Heller's California and Asia presences nicely complement Proskauer's East Coast focus -- and practice group compatibility ("e.g., pro-policy holder insurance coverage, similar patent practices").

Heller chairman Larrabee told the Lawyer: "I can categorically deny that Heller has concluded we must merge." But internally the message is a bit different. Associates were told in a recent video conference that "the firm is definitely looking to merge, that it is an 'awkward' size for the market."

In the meantime, Heller Ehrman continues to go about its business, including major pro bono matters. For example, working together with the Public Interest Law Project and Bay Area Legal Aid, the firm just filed a lawsuit against Alameda County, challenging the planned termination of general assistance benefits to thousands of indigent individuals. More details here.

Heller chairman coy over merger rumours [The Lawyer]
The bigger the better [The Lawyer]
Culture Wars Take Their Toll on Heller Ehrman [American Lawyer]
Morning Wrap: Partner Defections [The BLT / Blog of the Legal Times]
Heller's Tempestuous San Diego Office Loses 4 [Legal Pad / Cal Law]

If Winston & Strawn ends up merging with Heller Ehrman (or any other firm), here's a question to consider: Whose instant-messaging policy will prevail? A tipster tells us:

"Winston has blocked Meebo, Gchat, and all other possible chat clients."

We checked with sources at Winston, who report that this policy is nothing new. Instant messenger programs have been blocked at Winston for quite some time (at least several months).

But we still found the policy interesting, especially in light of recent blogosphere discussion of website blocking. It got us wondering: What other law firms prevent their employees from using instant messaging?

Instant messaging can be a huge time suck. Workplaces that ban IM'ing, at least between their employees and outsiders [FN1], are probably more productive. Most people would rather IM with a law school classmate about the evilness of Katherine Mayfair on Desperate Housewives than plow through a stack of sale/leaseback agreements.

But a ban on instant messaging -- especially if accompanied by other measures, like preventing people from accessing non-work email accounts from the office (hello, Goldman Sachs) -- could lower employee morale. We're reminded of how Allen & Overy faced a mini-revolt after banning Facebook in its London office (a policy it quickly reversed).

ATL readers: Any thoughts? Does your firm prevent you from using an instant-message client? If so, does it tick you off? If not, do you wish it did, à la Odysseus wanting to be tied to the mast?

[FN1] We're not counting the internal IM systems that some firms -- e.g., Kirkland & Ellis (if memory serves) -- have in place. These networks probably still transmit a lot of gossip, of the "omg have you seen the new para's outfit" variety. But when you're limited to IM'ing with your co-workers, a lot of your talk will be about.... work.

Here's an update to yesterday's post about rumors of possible merger talks between Heller Ehrman and Winston & Strawn. Remember, of course, that these are just rumors -- nothing more. Neither firm has offered any substantive comment. So please don't get too excited.

First, as reported by Legal Pad, the domain names of WinstonHeller.com and HellerWinston.com -- previously snapped up by an anonymous buyer -- are available once again. Legal Pad speculates:

Does the unURLing mean any merger is off? Dunno. If we were going to engage in unfounded speculation (one of the main reasons the Internet gods created blogs), we'd say low-grade talks had occurred, so someone grabbed the URLs, then decided to un-grab 'em just to quiet all the, um, unfounded speculation. Working great so far!

Second, just this afternoon, the following email from Winston's managing partner, Tom Fitzgerald, went around the firm:

From: Thompson, Nadja On Behalf Of Thomas Fitzgerald
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 1:49 PM
To: All Business FIRM
Subject:

This morning you may have noticed on the W&S Update an article published referencing the purchase of the domain names "WinstonHeller.com" and "HellerWinston.com," along with rumors of a potential merger between the two firms. W&S Update is an online service that reports all articles about W&S, regardless of content or veracity.

We feel it is important to notify our employees and attorneys that the firm did not secure, nor was it involved in securing, any domain names, including those referenced in the article. We are constantly contacted by other law firms, attorneys, and professional search firms to look at business opportunities which we explore as appropriate. As a matter of policy the firm does not acknowledge or otherwise comment on rumors regarding internal firm business or its clients.

Our tipster's take: "[A] rather shady explanation. They don't address the substance of the rumors, just that they didn't secure the domain names."

Right now we have nothing more than rumors. When we have something more substantive to report, we'll let you know.

Who Dumped WinstonHeller.com ... and Why? [Legal Pad / Cal Law]

Earlier: Law Firm Merger Mania: Winston and Heller, Sitting in a Tree? M-e-r-g-i-n-g?

You're already discussing the rumors in the comments to an unrelated post. So we figure we should probably give you a proper forum for such discussion.

In an earlier post, we alluded to merger rumors involving Heller Ehrman. We didn't name the supposed merger partner at the time, but Legal Pad just did:

Last Friday, wondering about continuing rumors of a Heller Ehrman merger with Chicago’s Winston & Strawn, we decided to check whether anyone had registered any interesting new domain names like, saaaay, www.hellerwinston.com or www.winstonheller.com.

Turns out that only the day before, both were registered to Domains by Proxy, a company which allows privacy-seeking customers to register sites using the company’s contact information. A commenter on Above the Law noted the same discovery Saturday, so when we got to work on Monday, we made some calls. A spokesman for Heller said the firm was not involved.

“We did not authorize any Web company or outside third party to purchase any particular domain or register any Web site,” he said.

Not them? Isn’t cyber-squatting so 1998?

Why the interest in domain name registrations? As you may recall, ATL broke the story of the Dewey Ballantine / LeBoeuf Lamb merger based on a domain name registration. They can be a useful clue to possible law firm combinations.

More discussion, after the jump.

The Washington office of Winston & Strawn was the site of a "mystery protest" this afternoon. For more details and a photo, see here. Wonkette's tipster writes: "What they did to deserve a protest is beyond me."

Our guess? Fashion-forward feminists, really pissed off about this.

Mystery Protest On Rain-Slicked D.C. Corner! [Wonkette]

Although many tipsters emailed us about it, we never wrote about this buzz-generating Wall Street Journal article, reporting on how many older lawyers are displeased by the overly informal, even sloppy attire of their younger colleagues. We didn't write about it earlier because we felt preempted: the piece received lots of online attention, from such widely read outlets as the ABA Journal and the WSJ Law Blog, where it generated heavy comment traffic.

But now we have a new angle on it. Focus on these portions of Christina Binkley's WSJ article:

[Winston & Strawn D.C. managing partner Thomas Mills] says he is partial to well-fitted Brioni suits for himself. He notes that the going rate for new associates in New York, Los Angeles and Washington is $160,000 a year -- enough to buy suits while paying down school loans. Yet all too often, associates show up at work in jeans -- attire that he doesn't condone "unless it's moving day."

Winston & Strawn brought in a personal shopper from a local department store last year to address associates on how to shop and dress for work. Mr. Mills says that when some associates do make an effort to dress up, they seem to base their look on Hollywood. "You get the TV-woman lawyer look with skirts 12 inches above the knee and very tight blouses," he says. "They have trouble sitting and getting into taxis."

These remarks apparently didn't go over too well back at Winston:

W&S DC office's managing partner comes off as a total a**. His comments re: his custom suits are one thing. But his comments re: the way women in the office dress have created a stir....

People are seriously pissed, particularly the women. Man comes off as a total pig.... Read the article, you'll see why.

This is prime ATL material. Firm has called impromptu associates meeting for 9:30 Monday, no topic given. But the guess is it is damage control.

The guess was correct. More about the meeting, after the jump.

We previously reported on bonuses in the New York office of Winston & Strawn. Now it's Washington's turn:

Winston & Strawn's DC associates recently received their bonuses. Associates received individualized bonus memos, so there is nothing that can be posted (this has been firm policy for years).

Bonuses were up significantly over previous years, and every associate seemed to be very happy with what they received. The general feeling is that the firm stepped up to the plate and is committed to paying market bonuses.

We do have one data point to pass along. One source (whose class year we won't reveal) received a bonus that was higher than the NYC market year-end bonus, but lower than the NYC market-plus-special bonus, for someone of their seniority. Pretty good (although this person did bill north of 2400 hours).

Speaking of Winston & Strawn in D.C., we hear that a very interesting meeting took place on Monday morning, concerning controversial remarks made by managing partner Tom Mills to the Wall Street Journal. We're working on a post. If you can enlighten us about what transpired, please drop us a line. Thanks.

In last month's ATL / Lateral Link survey we asked you which holidays you worked on, or expected to work on, during 2007. About half of you reported that you had worked on Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

Last week, we asked you how you fared this year. Did you take the day off to honor a champion of civil rights, or did you make it a "day on"?

We received just under 1,300 responses, and 44% of you reported that you took the day off. Associates in New York, Los Angeles and Boston were most likely to celebrate the holiday, while associates in Chicago, Atlanta, the Bay Area, and Texas were most likely to be working. (Respondents in the Bay Area were also most likely to work over Christmas and New Year's. Is it time for them to get New York bonuses?)

How did it break down on a firm by firm basis? DLA Piper, Milbank, Sidley & Austin, Dechert, Hunton & Williams, Jones Day, Latham, Mayer Brown, McDermott, Hughes Hubbard, McGuire Woods, Morgan Lewis, Nixon Peabody, Paul Hastings, and Sullivan & Cromwell each had multiple happy associates who reported that they had taken the day off. Kirkland & Ellis, Baker Botts, Dewey & LeBoeuf, O'Melveny & Myers, Weil, and Winston & Strawn each had mixed responses. Associates at Skadden, however, uniformly reported that they had worked the holiday, as Martin Luther King Jr. day is a "floating" holiday for the firm.

Of those who spent the day at the office, about 54% reported that they weren't actually asked to work the holiday, but had things they needed to get done. About a quarter reported that their offices were open. Another quarter said that partners told them to work on the holiday. About 8% were asked to work by clients. A surprising number of respondents wrote in that other associates had told them to work on the holiday.

A little over a third of respondents who worked on the holiday thought that the work did not justify the sacrifice.

Sorry it's been a little slow around here for the past few hours. In the morning, we had some technical difficulties. For most of this afternoon, we've been offline, speaking at this D.C. bar panel.

Anyway, now we're back. And we have a fair amount of bonus information to pass along.

The New York office of Winston & Strawn has announced year-end and special bonuses. Memo after the jump.

We heard about this first from a tipster with an offer. But it's confirmed by the firm website of Winston & Strawn:

Winston & Strawn associates who join the firm from judicial clerkships receive a clerkship bonus. Currently, the bonus paid to U.S. Court of Appeals and District Court clerks is $50,000. U.S. Supreme Court clerks receive a clerkship bonus that is competitive with the bonuses paid by other large national firms.

There's no longer any doubt that $50K is the going rate for clerkship bonuses. But we will keep covering the subject, even if it's not super-exciting, to encourage the firms that have yet to match to ante up.

Are you aware of clerkship bonus news that we haven't previously reported? If so, please email us (subject line: "Clerkship Bonus Watch"). Thanks.

Judicial Clerks at Winston: Compensation & Benefits [Winston & Strawn]

We've now covered over a third of the Vault 100 law firms in open threads. But that means we still have two-thirds to go (assuming we follow through to the end).

The next five firms are colorful. They include one firm that was featured in the Transformers movie, and another that used to employ a high-priced escort.

For your consideration (in Vault 100 order, prestige scores in parentheses):

31. Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker (6.545)
32. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP (6.352)
33. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (6.343)
34. Winston & Strawn LLP (6.316)
35. Dewey Ballantine LLP (6.313)

Please gossip away in the comments. Thanks.

The Vault Top 100 Law Firms [Vault]

Earlier: Vault 1-5; Vault 6-10; Vault 11-15; Vault 16-20; Vault 21-25; Vault 26-30

Since the tireless Howard Bashman is in transit, we'll temporarily assume his role as super-timely provider of appellate litigation news.

This just in: A divided Seventh Circuit panel has affirmed the criminal convictions of former Illinois Governor George H. Ryan and his associate, Lawrence Warner. The majority opinion is by Judge Diane Wood (who is a judicial hottie); the dissent is by Judge Michael Kanne (who is reportedly not fat).

This is especially bad news for Winston & Strawn. As some of you may recall, the firm reportedly blew $20 million on defending Governor Ryan, on a pro bono basis.

United States v. Ryan [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit]

To follow up on our earlier post, as well as this post from before the holiday, here are more confirmed pay raise announcements not previously mentioned in these pages:

1. Munger Tolles & Olson: They've raised to the $160K scale, according to The Recorder.

(The same article also mentions Pillsbury Winthrop going to $160K in its California offices; we previously reported that news before the holiday.)

2. Winston & Strawn: We previously posted about their raising salaries in their Washington office. But they have also gone to $160,000 in their home office in Chicago, according to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (subscription).

3. Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz: They now pay $165,000 for first years. We're not sure of what they pay higher up the ladder, but we're looking into it.

Pillsbury, Others Hit or Exceed $160K Mark for Associate Salaries [The Recorder via Law.com]
Rising associate salary tide washes over more firms here [Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (subscription)]

It's the Friday before a major holiday -- and firms are scrambling to get their pay raise announcements out the door. It's a nice way to send your bedraggled and overworked hardworking associates into a three-day weekend (assuming they don't need to come in on Monday).

We're about to sign off for the weekend, and we won't be back until Wednesday. (Billy Merck, who has filled our shoes in the past, will be your guest editor on Tuesday.)

Before we go, here are the latest salary announcements that we've confirmed:

1. McDermott Will & Emery

2. Manatt, Phelps & Phillips (Hat Tip: Lateral Link)

But the Manatt "raise" has a catch. Its effective date? January 1, 2008.

HA. That's kind of funny, in a sick sort of way -- provided you're not at Manatt.

Memos appear after the jump. And we're out the door. Have a great holiday weekend!

Update (2:50 PM): We've verified the Pillsbury Winthrop raise news. Memo below.

Update (3:25 PM): Jeez, you're going to make us miss our flight to Las Vegas. Memo from the D.C. office of Winston & Strawn, added after the jump.

We have confirmed the rumor that Winston & Strawn has raised associate base salaries in its California offices. A tipster forwarded us the memo, with this comment:

Got this from a friend of mine. I used to work there though no longer do. As he said, "I"m shocked -- this goes against every other encounter I've ever had at Winston."

Though it appears to only apply to their California offices (Los Angeles and San Francisco). No word on DC or Chicago.

Keep up the good work.

The full Winston & Strawn memo appears after the jump.