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

Judge Comparison brings several judge-level analytics into one report so you can compare two or more judges side by side. Use it for judicial research and to understand how selected judges differ in patent litigation activity, timing, outcomes, and motion results.

## What it tells you

Select two or more judges 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 judges you selected.

## Questions it can answer

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

## How to interpret the analysis

Judge Comparison shows **several different measures of judicial activity and historical outcomes for the judges 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 judge score.

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

## Overview

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

Highlights can include:

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

The workload section adds context about the selected judges' patent litigation activity and timing.

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

## Rankings

The **Rankings** view places the selected judges within the broader judge rankings.

You can rank judges by:

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

Use the selected-judge view to focus on the judges in your report or expand the results to see where they rank against the broader population.

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

## Outcomes

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

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 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 judges 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.

A broader comparison is included so you can see how the selected judges compare with the wider 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" judge.

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 judges being evaluated.

## Explore the underlying records

The report includes supporting records for the selected judges, 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

Judge Comparison summarizes historical judicial activity and outcomes. Differences between judges 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.
:::