My experience interviewing with this company was quite unique. The recruiting team was responsive, although they couldn't provide specific insights into the interview questions I should expect, except for mentioning a focus on dynamic programming for coding and technical rounds. During the interview process, the Hiring Manager meticulously examined every detail on my resume. They inquired about my educational background, graduation year, and the rationale behind my choice of major. For each of my previous roles, they delved into reasons for leaving, the impact I made, and probed about the most complex project I had worked on. The technical screening with the principal engineer covered topics like the differences between interfaces and abstract classes. They also questioned whether an abstract class can have a private constructor. In a SQL-related exercise, I was asked to write SQL code, though there were no screensharing tools involved. Interestingly, the interviewer was unfamiliar with Common Table Expressions (CTEs) and requested an alternative solution. Once again, they probed for insights into the most complex project I had worked on and any of the initiatives suggested by me. The subsequent SQL and coding assessment was conducted using Coderpad. The SQL and data modeling questions were straightforward and revolved around designing a university database and formulating queries based on the designed tables. Additionally, a Java coding question was posed, emphasizing logic and problem-solving. The behavioral round was a conventional one, where questions about my contributions, experiences with underperformers, and descriptions of the most challenging problems I had resolved were asked. An unusual query about the other companies I had applied to also surfaced. The final coding round involved a blend of conversation and a coding challenge, similar to famous the "Buy and Sell Stock" problem. The recruiter called this round as code review round but it involved pair programming.