throbber
Clinical Ophthalmology
`
`Dovepress
`
`Open Access Full Text Article
`
`open access to scientific and medical research
`
`O R I G I N A L R E S E A R C H
`
`Preclinical Investigation of Goniotomy Using Four
`Different Techniques
`
`This article was published in the following Dove Press journal:
`Clinical Ophthalmology
`
`1
`David A Ammar
`Leonard K Seibold2
`Malik Y Kahook2
`1Research Department, Lions Eye
`Institute for Transplant & Research,
`Tampa, FL, USA; 2Department of
`Ophthalmology, University of Colorado
`School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
`
`Correspondence: Malik Y Kahook
`University of Colorado School of
`Medicine, 1675 Aurora Ct, Aurora, CO
`80045, USA
`Tel +1 720 848 2500
`Fax +1 720 848 5014
`Email malik.kahook@cuanschutz.edu
`
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`http://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S281811
`
`Purpose: To evaluate the tissue-level effects of goniotomy techniques on human trabecular
`meshwork (TM).
`Design: Laboratory investigation.
`Methods: The TM from human cadaveric corneal rim tissue was treated using 4
`techniques: (1) microvitreoretinal (MVR) blade; (2) 360° trabeculotomy with 5-0 prolene
`suture; (3) the Kahook Dual Blade (KDB) Glide® device; (4) TrabEx™ device; tissue
`samples underwent standard histologic processing with H&E stain followed by compara-
`tive analyses.
`Results: The MVR blade exhibited incision of TM extending into the scleral wall. The
`TrabEx device removed a small portion of TM with large leaflet tissue remnants in all
`treated areas. 360° suture trabeculotomy resulted in incision of the TM proximate to
`Schwalbe’s line with no excised tissue evident in all treated areas. Areas treated with the
`KDB Glide device resulted in nearly complete excision of TM without injury to
`surrounding tissues.
`Conclusion: The various methods used for performing goniotomy or trabeculotomy resulted
`in varying degrees of incision or excision of TM. Only the KDB Glide device resulted in
`reliable excision of TM with the other devices producing incision or variable excision of
`tissue. Clinical correlation is required to better understand the implications of the current
`findings when using these methods to lower intraocular pressure in eyes with glaucoma.
`Keywords: glaucoma, goniotomy, trabecular meshwork
`
`Introduction
`Goniotomy—the surgical technique of incising trabecular meshwork (TM) to
`create a continuous opening from the anterior chamber to the Canal of Schlemm
`—was first described in 19361 and was soon relegated to the surgical manage-
`ment of childhood glaucomas2 until a popular resurgence over recent years in
`modified form for adult eyes with glaucoma.3–6 Numerous variations on the
`theme of goniotomy are currently used to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) in
`eyes with various forms of glaucoma; these include incisional goniotomy using
`a microvitreoretinal (MVR) blade or the Trabectome® device (MicroSurgical
`Technology, Redmond, WA); excisional goniotomy using the Kahook Dual
`Blade® device (KDB, New World Medical, Rancho Cucamonga, CA) or the
`TrabEx™/TrabEx+™ device (Microsurgical Technology); and 360° trabeculot-
`omy (gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy [GATT] using a suture or
`the iTrack® device [Ellex, Adelaide, Australia]) or the TRAB®360/OMNI®
`system (Sight Sciences, Menlo Park, CA).
`
`3519
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14 3519–3525
`© 2020 Ammar et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.
`php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the
`work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For
`permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0001
`
`

`

`Ammar et al
`
`Dovepress
`
`These various procedures have differential effects on the
`tissues of the anterior chamber angle. In a preclinical eva-
`luation, the histologic effects of the KDB, MVR, and
`Trabectome—both on the TM and neighboring tissue struc-
`tures—were previously described.7 The TrabEx device had
`not been commercialized at that time and was not included
`in the analysis. Also, since that report, a second-generation
`KDB instrument (KDB Glide, New World Medical) has
`been developed that incorporates features intended to
`enhance both its performance and its ease of use. The
`KDB Glide has incorporated beveled edges and rounded
`corners to the footplate, reducing its width for enhanced fit
`within Canal of Schlemm to facilitate smooth passage while
`excising TM (Figure 1). The second-generation instrument
`maintains the same ramp technology and distance between
`the parallel dual blades (230 microns) as the original KDB.
`In this report, we compare the histologic appearance of
`the TM and neighboring angle structures after goniotomy
`using the KDB Glide, MVR blade, TrabEx, and 360°
`trabeculotomy using a 5-0 prolene suture (in a manner
`
`emulating gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy
`[GATT]8), in human eye bank eyes.
`
`Methods
`Exemption for this preclinical study was in place from the
`Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB)
`for the use of human material prior to initiation of this study
`and the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki were followed.
`COMIRB instructions state that IRB exemption applies to
`non-human subject studies where all information is de-
`identified and devoid of non-public information disclosures.
`A total of 4 corneoscleral rims were used for this study. All
`tissue samples were obtained from eyes lacking any history
`of glaucoma or surgical procedures in the anterior chamber
`other than cataract surgery. After removal from storage
`medium, each sample was mounted on a platform oriented
`with the TM facing up and secured with tissue pins. Each of
`the four techniques assessed consisted of >180° TM treat-
`ment under microscopic visualization. MVR blade: TM was
`incised with an MVR blade, with effort made to maintain
`
`Figure 1 Schematic of the first-generation Kahook Dual Blade (KDB) on the left and the second-generation KDB Glide on the right illustrating new design features with
`a comparison overlay image (center), including beveled edges and rounded corners (red) at the bottom of the second-generation device to enhance passage through the
`Canal of Schlemm. The ramp and dual blade dimensions and design elements are conserved between the two devices.
`
`3520
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0002
`
`

`

`Dovepress
`
`Ammar et al
`
`incision depth into but not through the Canal of Schlemm.
`Suture trabeculotomy: A 360° ab interno trabeculotomy
`was performed by threading a 5-0 prolene suture into and
`fully around the Canal of Schlemm through a small goniot-
`omy incision, and then applying tension to both ends to
`cheesewire through the complete TM circumference. This
`approach mimicked the GATT procedure,8 modified for
`direct visualization in this laboratory study. KDB Glide:
`As has been reported for the KDB,7 the Glide’s blade tip
`(Figure 1) was used to incise TM and the blade’s footplate
`positioned and then advanced along the Canal of Schlemm.
`At the end of the intended excision length, the device was
`redirected by inserting the tip just beyond the initial TM
`strip and moving the device in the direction of the original
`treatment to completely excise a whole strip of TM.
`TrabEx: In similar fashion to the KDB Glide, the instru-
`ment’s tip (Figure 2) was used to incise TM and positioned
`in Canal of Schlemm. The device was then moved forward
`to treat an arc of TM. At the end of the intended treatment
`length, the device was redirected by inserting the tip just
`beyond the initial treated TM and moving the device in the
`direction of the original treatment to attempt removal of
`a TM strip.
`Following these procedures, each corneoscleral rim was
`preserved in 4% paraformaldehyde/phosphate-buffered sal-
`ine overnight at 4° C and then cut into quadrants with radial
`incisions. Rim sections were embedded in paraffin with the
`cut edge of the tissue facing the front of the block. Tissue
`sections, each 6 μm thick, were then cut from randomly
`selected locations across the treated areas. Sections of
`untreated TM were also sectioned for comparison to treated
`
`areas. Each sample was stained using Mayer’s hematoxylin-
`eosin Y (Richard-Allan Scientific, Kalamazoo, Michigan,
`USA). A Nikon Eclipse 80i microscope (Nikon, Melville,
`New York, USA) fitted with a Nikon D5-Fi1 color camera
`and a Nikon CFI 10x/Plan Fluor objective lens was used to
`obtain bright-field imaging. Images were then evaluated in
`masked fashion to qualitatively characterize the tissue
`effects of each technique.
`
`Results
`Systematic evaluation of tissue sections was undertaken.
`Findings were consistent across all sections within each eye
`for each procedure evaluated. The normal histology of the
`human anterior chamber angle is given in Figure 3, obtained
`from an unoperated portion of one of the four treatment
`samples. The iris is lost during recovery of the tissue from
`the donor leaving a remnant iris root; in contrast, the TM and
`Canal of Schlemm generally remain intact after recovery.
`Figure 4 depicts the angle following MVR goniotomy.
`This technique created a complete incision of the full
`thickness of the TM (Figure 4A). TM tissue was not
`removed, and large tissue leaflets remained overlying
`Canal of Schlemm. The incision was noted to extend
`beyond the outer wall of the canal, producing scleral injury
`of variable depth along the incision (Figure 4A vs 4B).
`Figure 5 depicts the angle following suture trabeculot-
`omy. TM incision proximate to Schwalbe’s line was evi-
`dent; no evidence of tissue excision or neighboring tissue
`injury was present.
`Figure 6 depicts the angle following TrabEx goniot-
`omy. Variable portions of TM removal were evident, and
`
`Figure 2 TrabEx blade, featuring two serrated blades (arrow) without a non-
`cutting ramp.
`
`Figure 3 Histology of the intact human anterior chamber angle showing the
`remnant of the iris (IR), the Canal of Schlemm (SC), and the trabecular meshwork
`(arrow). H&E stained sections, scale bar = 200 µm.
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`
`3521
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0003
`
`

`

`Ammar et al
`
`Dovepress
`
`Figure 4 The anterior chamber angle following MVR goniotomy created an incision in the trabecular meshwork (TM) without removal of TM leaflets (arrows), through the
`Canal of Schlemm and passing to varying depths into the scleral wall (SW). In (A), the incision extended deep into the scleral wall and a visible ~200 µm remnant of TM is
`apparent (arrow). In (B) the incision extends just past the outer wall of the Canal of Schlemm, also showing no excision of TM (arrows). H&E stained section, scale bar = 200
`µm.
`
`Figure 5 The anterior chamber angle following 360° Trabeculotomy resulted in incision through the trabecular meshwork (TM) proximate to Schwalbe’s line with no
`evident excision of TM leaflets. The arrows in (A and B) indicate large TM flap leaflets in two distinct sections of treated tissue. There is no apparent damage to the outer
`wall of the Canal of Schlemm in the treated areas. H&E stained section, scale bar = 200 µm.
`
`large leaflet tissue remnants ranging from 100 to 200
`microns in total length were visible in all treated areas.
`No injury to neighboring tissue was present.
`Figure 7 depicts the angle following goniotomy with
`the KDB Glide. Near complete excision of TM was noted
`in treatment areas, with intermittent areas of residual TM
`leaflet remnants of no more than 50 microns in width. No
`injury to neighboring tissue was present.
`
`Discussion
`The quest for a safe and effective alternative to trabecu-
`lectomy or tube-shunt implantation—specifically one that
`avoids the formation of a subconjunctival filtering bleb
`
`and its short- and long-term risks9,10 —has renewed inter-
`est in procedures that bypass the diseased TM in eyes with
`open-angle glaucoma. The bypass of TM facilitates egress
`of aqueous humor from the anterior chamber into the
`Canal of Schlemm and
`the distal outflow system.
`Methods by which the TM is bypassed in these various
`procedures include incisional and excisional procedures
`that cut TM from the anterior chamber into the Canal of
`Schlemm (goniotomy), incisional procedures that cut TM
`from the Canal of Schlemm into the anterior chamber
`(trabeculotomy), and various
`implantable
`trans-TM
`devices that shunt fluid across the TM through small
`lumens.3–6
`
`3522
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0004
`
`

`

`Dovepress
`
`Ammar et al
`
`Figure 6 The anterior chamber angle following TrabEx goniotomy showed partial removal of trabecular meshwork with large leaflet tissue remnants (ranging from 100–200
`µm in length, arrows) over the Canal of Schlemm (SC) in both (A and B). H&E stained sections, scale bar = 200 µm.
`
`Figure 7 The anterior chamber angle following KDB Glide goniotomy showing near-complete excision of TM overlying the Canal of Schlemm (SC) in both (A and B) with
`minimal leaflet tissue remnants (ranging from 0 to 50 µm, arrows). H&E stained sections, scale bar = 200 µm.
`
`Each of these surgical approaches produces an opening
`in the TM with unique characteristics, some of which have
`a significant impact on the aqueous flow capacity and thus
`potentially on IOP reduction. Incisional techniques disrupt
`but do not remove TM tissue, leaving remnants of tissue
`on either side of the incision that can reapproximate and
`close the ostomy.7,11 Excisional techniques remove or
`ablate a strip of TM, typically of 90°–180°. Ideally, the
`strip would be uniform in width and adequately wide to
`prevent reapproximation of remnant tissue leaflets; how-
`ever, the strip can be variable in width over the course of
`the excision,7 producing ostomies of variable size. Devices
`such as the trabecular microbypass (iStent® and iStent
`Inject® stents, Glaukos, San Clemente, CA) produce
`
`small stented apertures in TM (80–120 microns in
`diameter12) without tissue removal; histological analysis
`has revealed a basement membrane like layer of fibrous
`tissue overlying the internal ostomy of this device in some
`eyes post-implantation.13
`In the current study, of the 4 techniques evaluated, only
`two—the KDB Glide and TrabEx—perform excisional
`goniotomy. The KDB Glide produced an excisional open-
`ing in TM of consistent width along its entire length and
`did so without obvious damage to neighboring structures.
`This finding is consistent with a prior study of the original
`KDB instrument in cadaver eyes.7 The TrabEx device
`produced an excisional opening of variable width, leaving
`large (up to 200 microns) tissue leaflet remnants which can
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`
`3523
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0005
`
`

`

`Ammar et al
`
`Dovepress
`
`reapproximate to close the opening.7,11 While these
`devices have two blades, other key design features likely
`account for these histological differences. The KDB Glide
`features a non-cutting ramp that elevates, stretches, and
`guides TM to two parallel blades before any parallel inci-
`sions are created in the TM. The ramp’s role in putting TM
`on stretch before excision maximizes the width of the
`excised TM strip and minimizes residual TM tissue leaflets
`that could reapproximate and close the excisional ostomy
`between the anterior chamber and the lumen of Canal of
`Schlemm. The footplate of the KDB devices is designed to
`allow for proper fit and stability during the procedure
`which also likely leads to a more uniform treatment of
`tissue. In contrast, the TrabEx features two parallel ser-
`rated blades that extend to the tip of the device. The lack
`of a non-cutting ramp, as is found in KDB, leads to TM
`tissue cutting being initiated upon insertion of the device
`tip into the canal without the tissue being elevated and
`stretched. The TrabEx device also does not have a distinct
`footplate that would allow for evenly positioning the
`device on the anterior wall of the canal of Schlemm
`while advancing forward for treatment. These differences
`appear to lead to inconsistent excision of TM tissue along
`its path. The KDB Glide also improves on the original
`KDB by incorporating smoothed and rounded contours
`and a narrower footplate (203 microns compared to the
`TrabEx base width of 330 microns) to facilitate intra-canal
`passage (Figure 1). The diameter of Canal of Schlemm has
`been estimated to be approximately 240 microns or less;14
`instruments less wide than this dimension should thus
`engage and move within the canal more easily than over-
`sized instruments.
`In summary, the various methods used for performing
`goniotomy or trabeculotomy resulted in varying degrees of
`incision or excision of TM. Only the KDB Glide device
`resulted in reliable excision of TM, with the other devices
`producing incision or variable excision of tissue. Clinical
`correlation is required to better understand the implica-
`tions of the current findings when using these methods to
`lower IOP in eyes with glaucoma.
`
`Acknowledgments
`Assistance with manuscript preparation was provided by
`Tony Realini, MD, MPH, with support from New World
`Medical. Content from this paper was presented in part at
`the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
`Annual Meeting in June of 2020 as an abstract presenta-
`tion with interim findings. The poster’s abstract was
`
`Investigative
`in
`“Poster Abstracts”
`in
`published
`Ophthalmology and Visual Science: https://iovs.arvojour
`nals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2766810.
`
`Disclosure
`DA Ammar has received financial support from New
`World Medical for contract work through his employer.
`Malik Kahook is a consultant to New World Medical,
`SpyGlass Ophthalmics and Alcon. He receives patent roy-
`alties from Alcon, New World Medical, Johnson and
`Johnson Vision,
`Fluent Ophthalmics,
`SpyGlass
`Ophthalmics, ShapeTech and Aurea Medical. He also
`reports a patent US10327947B2 with royalties paid by
`New World Medical. Leonard K Seibold is a consultant
`to New World Medical and reports grants from Glaukos
`and Allergan, outside the submitted work. The authors
`report no other conflicts of interest in this work.
`
`References
`1. Barkan O. A new operation for chronic glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol.
`1936;19:951–966. doi:10.1016/S0002-9394(36)93838-2
`2. Barkan O. Present status of goniotomy. Am J Ophthalmol. 1953;36
`(4):445–453. doi:10.1016/0002-9394(53)90555-8
`3. Chen DZ, Sng CCA. Safety and efficacy of microinvasive glaucoma
`surgery. J Ophthalmol. 2017;2017:3182935. doi:10.1155/2017/
`3182935
`4. Lavia C, Dallorto L, Maule M, Ceccarelli M, Fea AM. Minimally-
`invasive glaucoma surgeries (MIGS) for open angle glaucoma:
`a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(8):
`e0183142. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0183142
`5. Pillunat LE, Erb C, Junemann AG, Kimmich F. Micro-invasive
`glaucoma surgery (MIGS): a review of surgical procedures using
`stents. Clin Ophthalmol. 2017;11:1583–1600. doi:10.2147/OPTH.
`S135316
`6. Richter GM, Coleman AL. Minimally invasive glaucoma surgery:
`prospects. Clin Ophthalmol.
`current
`status
`and
`future
`2016;10:189–206.
`7. Seibold LK, Soohoo JR, Ammar DA, Kahook MY. Preclinical inves-
`tigation of ab interno trabeculectomy using a novel dual-blade device.
`Am J Ophthalmol. 2013;155(3):524–529 e522. doi:10.1016/j.
`ajo.2012.09.023
`8. Grover DS, Godfrey DG, Smith O, Feuer WJ, Montes de Oca I,
`Fellman RL. Gonioscopy-assisted transluminal trabeculotomy, ab
`interno trabeculotomy: technique report and preliminary results.
`Ophthalmology.
`2014;121(4):855–861.
`doi:10.1016/j.
`ophtha.2013.11.001
`9. Gedde SJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, Budenz DL, Feuer WJ,
`Schiffman JC. Postoperative complications in the tube versus trabe-
`culectomy (TVT) study during five years of follow-up. Am
`J Ophthalmol. 2012;153(5):804–814. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.10.024
`10. Gedde SJ, Herndon LW, Brandt JD, Budenz DL, Feuer WJ,
`Schiffman JC. Surgical complications in the tube versus trabeculect-
`omy study during the first year of follow-up. Am J Ophthalmol.
`2007;143(1):23–31. doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2006.07.022
`11. Amari Y, Hamanaka T, Futa R. Pathologic investigation failure of
`trabeculotomy. J Glaucoma. 2015;24(4):316–322. doi:10.1097/
`IJG.0b013e31829e1d6e
`
`3524
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0006
`
`

`

`Dovepress
`
`Ammar et al
`
`12. Manning D. Real-world case series of iStent or iStent inject trabe-
`cular micro-bypass
`stents combined with cataract
`surgery.
`Ophthalmol Ther. 2019;8(4):549–561.
`13. Capitena Young CE, Ammar DA, Seibold LK, Pantcheva MB,
`SooHoo JR, Kahook MY. Histopathologic examination of trabecular
`meshwork changes after
`trabecular bypass stent
`implantation.
`J Glaucoma. 2018;27(7):606–609. doi:10.1097/IJG.0000000000000968
`
`14. Ten Hulzen RD, Johnson DH. Effect of fixation pressure on juxtaca-
`nalicular tissue and Schlemm’s canal. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci.
`1996;37(1):114–124.
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology
`Publish your work in this journal
`Clinical Ophthalmology is an international, peer-reviewed journal cover-
`ing all subspecialties within ophthalmology. Key topics include:
`Optometry; Visual science; Pharmacology and drug therapy in eye dis-
`eases; Basic Sciences; Primary and Secondary eye care; Patient Safety
`and Quality of Care Improvements. This journal is indexed on PubMed
`
`Central and CAS, and is the official journal of The Society of
`Clinical Ophthalmology (SCO). The manuscript management system
`is completely online and includes a very quick and fair peer-review
`system, which is all easy to use. Visit http://www.dovepress.com/
`testimonials.php to read real quotes from published authors.
`
`Dovepress
`
`Submit your manuscript here: https://www.dovepress.com/clinical-ophthalmology-journal
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology 2020:14
`
`3525
`submit your manuscript | www.dovepress.com
`DovePress
`
`Clinical Ophthalmology downloaded from https://www.dovepress.com/ by 98.169.249.44 on 07-Nov-2020
`
`For personal use only.
`
`Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Ex. 2014–0007
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket