---
title: "Court Rankings"
description: "Compare patent courts by case volume, party-favorable outcomes, or transfer-motion grant rate."
---

Court Rankings compares courts across several measures of patent litigation activity and outcomes. Use it to identify courts with substantial patent case experience and compare selected outcome or motion-result measures across the same research population.

## What it tells you

Court Rankings can rank courts by:

- **Cases**
- **Percentage of Patentee Favorable Outcomes**
- **Percentage of Patent Challenger Favorable Outcomes**
- **Grant Rate of Motions to Transfer Venue**

The results are shown in a ranked table, with the displayed values changing to match the ranking measure you select.

## Questions it can answer

- Which courts have handled the most patent cases?
- Which courts have the highest percentage of patentee-favorable outcomes?
- Which courts have the highest percentage of patent-challenger-favorable outcomes?
- How do courts compare on motions to transfer venue?
- How does the ranking change for a particular patent technology or time period?

## How to interpret the analysis

Court Rankings shows **relative court experience or outcomes within the population that matches your selected criteria**.

When **Cases** is selected, the ranking reflects patent case volume.

The favorable-outcome rankings focus on qualifying case outcomes for the selected side. They should be read as historical outcome patterns, not as a prediction of how a court will decide a future case.

The transfer ranking compares courts based on recorded results for qualifying motions to transfer venue.

Use the underlying case or motion volume alongside any percentage-based ranking. A high percentage based on a smaller body of qualifying matters represents a different level of experience than the same percentage based on a much larger history.

## Filters and defaults

Use the controls on the left to focus the ranking.

Available criteria include:

- ranking measure
- patent technology
- date range

The results table also includes controls that can be used to narrow the displayed population.

Changing the selected measure or filters recalculates the ranking for the relevant set of courts and matters.

## Reading the results

Each row shows a court's rank, name, and the measure used for the selected ranking.

Use **Cases** when court experience and volume are the primary concern. Use one of the percentage-based measures when you want to compare historical outcomes under the same criteria.

You can also download the results as a CSV.

## Important considerations

Court Rankings summarizes historical activity and outcomes. It does not measure court quality or predict the result of a future matter.

Percentage-based comparisons are most meaningful when courts are evaluated using the same filters and when the underlying case or motion volume is considered alongside the percentage.

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