How we collect, structure, and classify the data behind every expert page.
WitnessLens consolidates, for each patent expert witness, the record a litigator would otherwise assemble by hand: a CV, an hourly rate history, a representation history across parties and firms, every PTAB Final Written Decision the expert has been part of, and every Daubert ruling on the expert in district court. This page summarizes where that data comes from and how we classify outcomes.
Every data point on the platform is compiled from public records. We do not purchase data from third-party brokers and we do not collect data from individuals.
PTAB material is drawn from the public trial data published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. District court material is drawn from PACER. Expert CVs are sourced from filings the expert has placed in the public record. We do not scrape personal websites, faculty pages, or LinkedIn.
The platform refreshes on a roughly weekly cycle. There is no real-time or daily refresh; data should be treated as accurate as of the last ingest, not as of today.
The platform covers patent expert witnesses. On the PTAB side, that is AIA trial proceedings. On the district court side, that is patent dockets with substantive Daubert activity captured in the public record. We do not cover experts who appear exclusively in non-patent litigation, criminal proceedings, or regulatory matters.
The same expert, party, or law firm can appear in filings under many surface forms. Different surface forms of the same real-world entity are unified into a single canonical record on the platform; the user sees the canonical form and the URL points to it. Where the signal is ambiguous, we default to splitting; two real people merged into one record is a worse research error than one person represented as two records that can later be joined.
PTAB Final Written Decisions. For each expert in each proceeding that has reached a final written decision, we record whether the Board credited the expert. The result is bucketed as Credited, Not Credited, or Mixed. Proceedings that have not yet reached a final written decision are shown as Pending; those that terminated before a final written decision, or where credit cannot be determined from the available text, are shown as not applicable.
District court Daubert motions. For each expert in each docket, we aggregate the substantive court rulings on Daubert motions involving that expert and bucket the result as Survived, Excluded, or Mixed. Procedural orders, mootness rulings, and deferred decisions are not treated as substantive outcomes.
Public records can themselves contain errors, omissions, or out-of-date entries. WitnessLens does not warrant the accuracy of the underlying records and does not opine on the truthfulness of statements made within them. We continuously audit our processing of the public record and apply corrections.
If you are an expert profiled on the platform, or you are representing one, and you believe a profile contains an error or has been misattributed, write to contact@witnesslens.com.
© 2026 WitnessLens. All rights reserved.