This is probably less than ideal but I just use the question bank for drilling the earlier logic games. I have a large notebook filled with game boards. Once I'm finished drilling earlier LG sections, I'll go back to paper PT exams.

Congrats!

I did PT 53 recently so this is fresh in my mind. The difference is simple and it has little, if any, to do with the argument structure. Statement B is not flawed because it is a true statement while the other statements (conclusion part) are not necessarily true (they could be true or they could be false). To see the subtle difference in B, think about how the other statements (conclusion) could be false. You can't do the same for B.

You're right. Frederick doesn't mention all genres but you can infer his position based on his explicit statement. That is, given a museum's limited resources, buying representative works of all genres is mutually exclusive to buying recognized masterpieces. Remember that you are always choosing the best answer, not the perfect answer choice.

I took 53 recently and will try to at least listen in tonight. Curious how others do BR. Thanks!

From what I gather, you are circling all the question you are getting wrong (at least 11-12 circles per section). The fact you are circling so many questions suggests a speed issue. Especially since you can answer those very same questions confidently when untimed. A good way to improve speed is increasing familiarity with all the different question stems. If you're not already doing this, I also suggest not bothering to read all the answer choices for questions (after identifying the correct answer) that are obviously 1 or 2 difficult level.

I'm curious how you're doing your BRs? Do you grade before BR? Are you using clean sheets? Are you only redoing questions you've circled?

Congrats! Way to keep at it.

I got 99 problems. LSAT ain't one of them?

Congrats!

Things may have changed since I took the GRE but the version I took was very similar to the SAT. FWIW, I took a GMAT PT cold a few years ago and it was very easy. GRE is a little tougher than the GMAT. LSAT is substantially more difficult than either.

B is what I consider to be a mishmash of words. The plausibility of a fatty brain causing fatty food craving is extremely low. That's like saying an oniony brain causes onion cravings.

Do you use the App on tablet or phone? Have you considered a part time day care? For example, my church offers a 2 or 3 day option (5 hours per day) daycare service for ~$200 a month.

I usually watch the curriculum using headphones so even if my baby daughter is crying, it's not too distracting. I've taken parts of 2 PT's downstairs while she was crying upstairs. You get used to it. It might even be beneficial training for possible test day noise distractions.

@ngir1293288 @ngir1293288 Thanks!

@guitarnara518 Few =/= Some

When All is 100

Few is 1 to 50

Some is 1 to 100

Congrats! The admissions people are busy and would not initiate an interview unless you are a strong candidate. You might want to watch the Mike Spivey webinar recorded a few weeks ago. He had some tips on how to interact with admissions people.

A 10 minute YouTube video (non HD resolution) uses ~10-30 MB of bandwidth. I'd imagine the course videos would not use more than that and, if anything, it's probably less.

Has anyone reached out to their UG law school advisor? Is that generally helpful or a waste of time? Or is it better to reach out to fellow alumni who've graduated from target schools?

I thought the case hinged on the EDTA results. The defense relied primarily on its police planting evidence theory to explain the physical evidence linking Steve Avery to Halbach. Since law enforcement officers are granted a strong presumption that they don't go around planting evidence, the defense needed to "prove" their theory. The fact that most if not all of the physical evidence was discovered by MCSD is consistent with that theory. But this consistency is largely circumstantial. That's why detecting EDTA on the RAV4 blood was so important as it would have conclusively proven the defense theory.

I've looked at the FBI lab documents that describes the LC-MS experimental procedures and summarizes some of the EDTA results. Unfortunately, no actual data is attached. I am currently in the camp that the blood in the RAV4 did not contain EDTA (but I wouldn't bet anything on it). While I agreed with Arvizu (defense QC auditor) that the FBI did not conclusively measure a proper detection limit for the positive detection of EDTA, LC-MS is an extremely sensitive instrument. Interestingly, Arvizu pointed out that a 2 microliter sample of Steve Avery's blood from the purple capped vial came back negative for EDTA while a 1 microliter sample of the same blood came back positive. So at the very least, there is some doubt whether the FBI technique is robust for small sample volumes.

@aakritichaudhary506 With your engineering and medical background, you should have a lot of options in patent law. One underrated aspect of patent law is that people are generally happy and excited to talk to patent lawyers. In other specialization, lawyers are called upon because something unfortunate has happened. That being said, new patent attorneys get easily crapped on by clients (not to mention by partners as well as other attorneys). Clients hold all the cards because they can threaten to take portfolios elsewhere. Not only that, the clients know more about the technical details than you do. You no longer have the mystique that comes with being the only expert in the room. In fact, I would say for surgeon, one of the biggest challenge of this jump will be going from having a lot of respect from your clients to sometimes having very little.

@aakritichaudhary506 Based on your comments so far, I am assuming that you want to be a patent attorney. I think the negative feedback you're getting has very little to do MD's being frowned upon but everything to do with economics. The legal job market is just coming out of what some describe as the absolute low point (ca.2010). At the top, I believe the earning potentials for attorneys and surgeons are comparable. For everything below, surgeons will win out.

As far as your technical background is considered, MD might be viewed as less attractive than PHD unless your clinical background would be of special use. I could also see MD's being grouped with PHD's from biological sciences. Of course, I'm brushing with very broad strokes so take all of this with a grain of salt. FWIW, the best patent attorney I've worked with started out as an MD who later went onto law school.

@68602 If you're interested in patent prosecution the market is full of jobs for people with EE/CS degrees. Market is much worse for those with biology or even ME backgrounds. Generally, getting your first job is the toughest. It probably takes 2-3 years to learn how to write a good patent application. Having a good JD helps getting your foot in but it's more about your technical background. Your specific area of technical expertise becomes somewhat less important (for subsequent jobs) once you gain experience writing patents. Even though I have a science PHD, I have no plans to do patent prosecution after getting a JD.

My humble opinion is that T3 or even T14 is probably overkill for patent prosecution. Patent prosecution is viewed as grunt work by a lot of attorneys. With the way billing works nowadays (fixed pricing per application), you can't write patent applications in biglaw forever. It's an unsustainable system for 95% of the lawyers IMO. That's why there is a shift in biglaw and companies to hire patent agents and technical advisors to do the prosecution work. Clients will often ask the law firm to hire or bring in agents or advisors to do work because they do quality work at half the cost. The majority of patent examiners are technical people not attorneys. They generally prefer to see technical arguments over legal arguments.

Would this be beneficial for a general audience or specifically those who have taken PT77?