Patent cases are complex and flood the courts, trading off with other cases.

Because federal courts operate with limited judicial resources, judicial efficiency is critical to ensuring that courts can meet the obligations of a burgeoning caseload. 38

[[FN 38]]

38 See James F. Holderman & Halley Guren, The Patent Litigation Predicament in the United States, 2007 U. Ill. J.L. Tech. & Pol'y 1, 4 (noting that volume and diversity "demand constant attention to efficiency, without which the caseload would burgeon beyond the capability of any one judge to provide justice as is necessary in each case").

[[END FN 38]]

Of course, efficiency must not come at the expense of accuracy. Yet a trade-off between these goals is unavoidable when a particular area of law features heightened complexity: either too little time is being spent to fully develop or understand the issues, or too much time is being spent at the expense of other cases. 39

[[FN 39]]

39 Federal District Court Judge James Holderman wrote:

I do not have the luxury of spending the time to learn more about a specific area of the law than necessary to resolve a particular case or a particular issue that may need resolution… . Because of the constant press of the rest of our caseload, we often find it difficult to devote the time that, in a perfect world, would be devoted to any case, let alone a complex patent case.

[[END FN 39]]

Expertise can help resolve, or at least ease, this tension because it ensures efficiency without diminishing accuracy. 40 [*1063] Consequently, expertise is most suitable, even necessary, when a disproportionate amount of judicial resources are required to decide a particular class of cases because of their heightened complexity.