---
title: "Court Comparison"
description: "Compare two or more patent courts across workload, rankings, case outcomes, and motion results."
---

Court Comparison brings several court-level analytics into one report so you can compare two or more courts side by side. Use it for venue research, court-selection analysis, and a broader review of how selected courts differ in patent litigation activity and outcomes.

## What it tells you

Select two or more courts to create a comparison report with four main views:

- **Overview**
- **Rankings**
- **Outcomes**
- **Motion Success**

The report also includes supporting case, outcome, and remedy records for the courts you selected.

## Questions it can answer

- How do selected courts compare in patent case volume and current workload?
- Which selected court has the strongest historical patentee outcome rate?
- How do case outcomes differ between the selected courts?
- How do the courts compare on motions to transfer venue or other selected motions?
- Which court tends to reach trial or claim construction sooner?
- How do the selected courts rank against the broader set of district courts?

## How to interpret the analysis

Court Comparison shows **several different measures of court activity and historical outcomes for the courts you select**.

The report combines volume, timing, outcome, and motion analysis. Each section answers a different question, so the measures should be read separately rather than treated as one overall court score.

Historical patterns can provide useful context for venue research, but they do not predict how a court will decide a future case.

## Overview

The **Overview** summarizes key differences between the selected courts.

Highlights can include:

- highest patentee win rate
- highest venue transfer rate
- most cases
- cases filed over time

The **Workload** table adds context about court activity using measures such as:

- total cases
- active cases
- recent orders
- recently active judges
- average days to trial
- average days to claim construction
- recent docket entries

Use **Show Selected Courts** to focus on the courts in your report or **Show All Courts** to place them in a broader district-court context.

For the current year, the filing trend can be viewed as **YTD** or **Estimate Current Year**.

## Rankings

The **Rankings** view places the selected courts within the broader court rankings.

You can rank courts by:

- cases
- percentage of patentee favorable outcomes
- percentage of patent challenger favorable outcomes
- grant rate of motions to transfer venue

Use **Show Selected Courts** to focus on the courts in your report or **Show All Courts** to see where they rank against other courts.

Patent technology and date controls can be used to narrow the comparison.

## Outcomes

The **Outcomes** view compares qualifying case outcomes for the selected courts.

Results can be displayed as **Totals** or **Percentages** and can include categories such as:

- Patentee Won
- Mixed
- Patent Challenger Won
- Settled, when included

You can refine the outcome comparison by case phase at termination, termination year, patent technology, ANDA status, HAE status, and settlement treatment.

Use the outcome table when you want to move from the chart into the underlying result set.

## Motion Success

The **Motion Success** view compares how selected courts resolved a chosen type of motion.

Select the motion posture, document type, and optional legal issue, then refine the analysis with criteria such as date range, patent technology, ANDA status, or HAE status.

The chart focuses on decisions categorized as **Granted**, **Denied**, or **Partial** and can be viewed as totals or percentages.

An **All Courts** comparison is included so you can see how the selected courts compare with the broader population under the same research context.

## Reading the report

Use the report as a collection of related views rather than looking for a single "best" court.

For example:

- use **Overview** for workload and timing context
- use **Rankings** for broader relative position
- use **Outcomes** for historical case-result patterns
- use **Motion Success** for a specific motion question

The strongest comparisons use the same filters and time period across the courts being evaluated.

## Explore the underlying records

The report includes supporting folders for the selected courts, including case, outcome, and remedy records where available.

Use these records to investigate the matters behind a chart or comparison and understand the factual and procedural context that produced the aggregate result.

CSV downloads are available for several report tables when you need to continue the analysis outside Docket Navigator.

## Important considerations

Court Comparison summarizes historical court activity and outcomes. Differences between courts can reflect differences in case mix, parties, technologies, time periods, and procedural posture.

Use filters to make the compared populations relevant to your research, and review the underlying cases before drawing conclusions from an aggregate result.

:::note
Analytics tools vary by library. See [Analytics Availability](/analytics/availability/) for current availability.
:::