throbber
APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, May 1986, p. 985-989
`0099-2240/86/050985-05$02.00/0
`Copyright C 1986, American Society for Microbiology
`
`Vol. 51, No. 5
`
`Pilot Plant Production of Rhamnolipid Biosurfactant by
`Pseudomonas aeruginosa
`H. E. REILING,t U. THANEI-WYSS, L. H. GUERRA-SANTOS,t R. HIRT, 0. KAPPELI,* AND A. FIECHTER
`Department of Biotechnology, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Honggerberg, CH - 8093 Zurich, Switzerland
`
`Received 2 December 1985/Accepted 2 February 1986
`
`Rhamnolipid biosurfactants were continuously produced with Pseudomonas aeruginosa on the pilot plant
`scale. Production and downstream processing elaborated on the laboratory scale were adapted to the larger
`scale. Differences in performance resulting from the scale-up are discussed. A biosurfactant concentration of
`approximately 2.25 g liter-' was achieved. The biosurfactant yield on glucose was 77 mg g- h-1, and the
`productivity was 147 mg liter-' h-1, corresponding to a daily production of 80 g of biosurfactant. The first
`enrichment step consisted of an adsorption chromatography which was followed by an anion-exchange
`chromatography. The resulting product was 90% pure, and the overall recovery of active material was above
`60% with the downstream processing used.
`
`Pseudomonas aeruginosa produces rhamnolipids that ex-
`ert an important role when the cells grow at the expense of
`7). The active fraction contained two
`hydrocarbons (5,
`compounds, R-1 and R-2 (1, 6). They differed in rhamnose
`content, with R-1 having two rhamnose units and R-2 having
`3-hydroxydecanoic acid in both
`one. The lipid part was
`cases. Recently, Wagner and co-workers (11) reported that
`compounds with a variable length of the carbohydrate moi-
`ety are produced under appropriate conditions (resting
`cells).
`An increased interest for potential application of microbial
`surface active compounds is based on their broad range of
`functional properties which mainly comprise emulsification,
`phase separation, wetting, foaming, surface activity, and
`viscosity reduction of heavy crude oils (3, 8). Potential
`applications can be envisaged in several industries such as
`agriculture, food, textiles, cosmetics, petrochemical, and
`petroleum production.
`In view of wide-spread utilization, process development
`for large-scale production of biosurfactants is an obvious
`necessity. In a previous study we have shown the depen-
`dence of biosurfactant production on the medium composi-
`tion (4). It became obvious that environmental parameters
`considerably affect biosurfactant release. Here, we report on
`the production of biosurfactant on the pilot plant level and
`on the downstream processing adapted to the scale.
`MATERIALS AND METHODS
`Microorganism. A strain of Pseudomonas aeruginosa
`(DSM 2659) was used throughout this work which was
`originally isolated from soil samples in the vicinity of an oil
`refinery. The cells were maintained as frozen glycerol
`cultures (1:1 mixture of freshly grown cells and 30% [wt/vol]
`glycerol solution) at -70°C.
`Medium. The optimized medium 3M which was used for
`P. aeruginosa growth and biosurfactant production was the
`same as described previously (4), except that iron sulfate
`was omitted and phosphoric acid (84%) was added to a final
`concentration of 55 ,ul g-' of glucose supplied. The main
`
`* Corresponding author.
`t Present address: R. Maag AG, Agrobiology Research, CH-8157
`Dielsdorf, Switzerland.
`t Present address: Transgene S.A., F-67000 Strasbourg, France.
`
`characteristics of medium 3M are: carbon and phosphorus
`excess as well as nitrogen and iron limitation.
`Glucose supply normally amounted to 30 g liter-', but
`concentrations up to 80 g liter-1 were also tested. The
`medium for the continuous culture was prepared in 2,000-
`liter batches in an in situ sterilizable 3,000-liter stirred-
`tank bioreactor. Inocula were grown in a 2% (wt/vol) glucose
`medium 3M including iron sulfate but 4.1 g of
`Na2HPO4 - 2H20 liter-l plus 5.9 g of KH2PO4 liter-l were
`used as buffering components in place of phosphoric acid.
`Unless unavailable, all chemicals used were of technical
`grade. Because of the severe influence of trace elements on
`growth and production, deionized water was used through-
`out.
`Cultivation conditions. Medium optimization with respect
`to biosurfactant production in continuous culture was per-
`formed with the used organism on lab scale in a 5-liter
`compact loop reactor (COLOR; Braun, Melsungen, Federal
`Republic of Germany) (4). On the pilot plant scale continu-
`ous production was carried out in a 50-liter COLOR bioreac-
`tor which was described in detail elsewhere (2).
`The working volume was 23 liters, growth temperature
`was 33°C, aeration was at 0.5 volume of air per volume of
`liquid per min (vvm), stirrer speed was 1,000 rpm, and the
`pH was maintained at 6.2 with 6 N H3PO4 plus 6 N KOH.
`The bioreactor was equipped and operated with a centrifuge-
`type mechanical foam separator operated at 1,000 rpm. In
`addition, a foam recycling system was connected to the air
`outlet for security reasons. The outlet air was fed into a
`separation funnel from which the air escaped on top, and the
`liquid accumulating at the bottom was recycled to the
`bioreactor. The system was operated at a dilution rate of
`0.065 h-1 during the production process. A constant liquid
`volume was maintained in the bioreactor by a weight con-
`trol. Inocula were grown in several baffled 1-liter shake
`flasks with 200 ml of medium on a rotary shaker at 33°C.
`Late-exponential-phase cells (1 liter) served as the inoculum
`for the start-up batch cultivation in the bioreactor. When the
`glucose was exhausted, the culture was switched from batch
`to continuous operation.
`Analytical methods. Determination of biomass, residual
`glucose concentration, surface and interfacial tension, and
`Fcmc (an indirect measure for biosurfactant concentration)
`values has been described elsewhere (4). Nitrate and nitrite
`
`985
`
`PETITIONERS
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1030 Page 1 of 5
`
`

`

`986
`
`REILING ET AL.
`
`APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL.
`
`Biosurfactont product
`FIG. 1. Flow sheet for the pilot plant production and downstream processing of rhamnolipid biosurfactants from P. aeruginosa.
`
`were measured semiquantitatively with Merckoquant test
`sticks (E. Merck AG, Darmstadt, Federal Republic of Ger-
`many). Oxygen partial pressure and the composition of the
`exit air were recorded continuously as reported earlier
`(4, 9).
`Downstream processing. The general procedure for down-
`stream processing of the produced biosurfactant was devel-
`oped for laboratory-scale investigations but was principally
`transferable to pilot plant scale. A scheme of the whole
`downstream process is given in Fig. 1. The outlet of the
`continuous production in the bioreactor was collected in a
`cooled reservoir tank (300 liters). Periodically the cells were
`separated by centrifugation (Westfalia, type SA14-47-476),
`and the cell-free culture liquid was stored in a second
`reservoir where 0.2% (vol/vol) formaldehyde was added to
`prevent microbial growth. All chromatographic steps were
`installed in duplicates. In this way, loading and regeneration
`of the columns could be done in parallel.
`Loading of the columns. A supply line was installed to the
`columns which ended in a special device consisting of five
`stainless steel tubings arranged spiderlike to feed the liquid
`evenly to the surface of the resin. A sieve (mesh size, 0.2
`mm) was placed on top of the resin to protect it from solids
`still in the liquid and from being whirled up. Flow to the
`
`columns was induced by peristaltic pumps (type 5025;
`Watson-Marlow, Falmouth, United Kingdom).
`The liquid level in the column was monitored by a capac-
`itive probe (NTK 20; Visolux, Baden-Baden, Federal Re-
`public of Germany) attached to the outer surface of the
`column. The supply pump controlled by this probe, main-
`tained a constant liquid level in the column, which allowed a
`continuous unattended loading of the columns.
`Adsorption chromatography. The primary enrichment of
`the rhamnolipids was achieved by adsorption chromatogra-
`phy on a polystyrene resin (Amberlite XAD-2; Rohm and
`Haas, Philadelphia, Pa.). The resin (7 kg) was placed in a
`glass column (650 by 200 mm), yielding a bed height of
`approximately 330 mm and corresponding to a bed volume of
`about 10.4 liters. The column was equilibrated with 0.1 M
`potassium phosphate buffer (pH 6.1), and then the cell-free
`culture liquid was applied at a flow rate of approximately 20
`liters h-' at the beginning and 10 liters h-1 towards the end
`of the loading procedure. The adsorption of the active
`compounds was assayed by measuring the surface tension at
`the column outlet. Adsorption chromatography was termi-
`nated when the surface tension dropped below 35 mN m-
`The column was then washed with 2 to 3 bed volumes of
`distilled water. The elution of the biosurfactant was subse-
`
`PETITIONERS
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1030 Page 2 of 5
`
`

`

`VOL. 51, 1986
`
`PILOT PLANT BIOSURFACTANT PRODUCTION
`
`987
`
`TABLE 1. Comparison of continuous growth and biosurfactant production of P. aeruginosa on laboratory and pilot plant scales
`Yx/s
`Yp,s
`Biomass concn
`rp
`Biosurfactant concn
`Residual glucose concn
`Initial glucose concn
`Bioreactor size,
`(mg liter-' h-')
`(mg g-')
`(g liter-')a
`(g liter-')
`(g liter-')
`(g liter-')
`(mg g-1)
`dilution rate (h-1)
`5 liters
`2.5
`1.7
`0.2
`18.2
`0.05
`2.6
`3.8
`0.6
`36.5
`0.12
`2.25
`2.5
`0.7
`50 liters (0.065)
`30.0
`a Calculated from an average rhamnose content on the laboratory scale (4) and from Fcmc on the pilot plant scale.
`
`88
`309
`147
`
`140
`140
`85
`
`97
`72
`77
`
`quently effected with methanol. Fractions of 1 to 2 liters
`were collected and analyzed for biosurfactant content by
`measuring interfacial tension and Fcmc values. Fractions
`with Fcmc values above 10 were pooled, and the solvent was
`evaporated (Rotavapor R 151; Buchi, Flawil, Switzerland).
`The adsorbent was regenerated by eluting the column with
`2 to 3 bed volumes of 1 N NaOH in methanol. An additional
`flushing of the column with 20% acetone in 1 N NaOH was
`performed after five adsorption-desorption cycles and then
`the column was rinsed with distilled water until the pH of the
`outlet was neutral. Subsequently 2 to 3 bed volumes of 1 N
`H2SO4 were applied, followed by a distilled water rinse.
`Finally, the column was equilibrated with potassium phos-
`phate buffer (pH 6.1).
`Ion-exchange chromatography. Further purification of sur-
`face-active compounds was achieved by ion-exchange chro-
`matography on DEAE-Sepharose CL 6B (Pharmacia, Up-
`psala, Sweden). DEAE-Sepharose (6.5 liters) was packed
`into a column (400 by 200 mm), yielding a bed volume of
`approximately 6.2 liters and a bed height of 200 mm.
`The column was equilibrated with 10 mM Tris hydrochlo-
`ride buffer (pH 8) containing 10% (vol/vol) ethanol. The
`concentrated residue from the adsorption column was di-
`luted 10-fold with the same buffer containing 20% (vol/vol)
`ethanol and applied to the column after filtration through a
`cotton filter. The flow rate was 6 liters h-1. The effluent was
`again assayed for surface-active compounds to survey the
`charging of the column.
`The column was washed with 2 to 3 bed volumes of 0.1 M
`NaCl in 10 mM Tris hydrochloride buffer containing 10%
`(vol/vol) ethanol. The biosurfactants were then released by
`0.8 M NaCl in the same buffer. Fractions (1 to 2 liters) were
`collected. The fractions with low surface tension (below 35
`mN m-1) were pooled and subjected to a second adsorption
`chromatography on XAD-2 resin. The methanol eluate was
`evaporated in vacuo, and the residue was lyophilized.
`Regeneration of the affinity column was carried out with 2
`M NaCl in Tris hydrochloride buffer (pH 8) containing 20%
`ethanol. After 5 cycles, the column was additionally treated
`with 0.2 M NaOH containing 20% methanol. This removed a
`reddish pigment that also accumulated in the ion-exchange
`column.
`
`RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
`Biosurfactant production. The best conditions for bio-
`surfactant production in the pilot plant were obtained with
`the slightly modified medium 3M of Guerra-Santos et al. (4).
`With a dilution rate of 0.065 h-1 and a 3% glucose concen-
`tration, steady states were maintained for several weeks.
`Residual glucose concentration was approximately 0.7 g
`liter-1, and oxygen partial pressure was always above 50%
`of air saturation.
`Biosurfactant concentration stood at an Fcmc of about 150.
`When an average critical micelle concentration of 15 mg
`
`liter-1 (10) was used, the product concentration p amounted
`to 2.25 g liter-' (Table 1), corresponding to a product yield
`on glucose (Yp,s) of 77 mg of biosurfactant per g of glucose.
`The productivity of the system rp thus amounted to 0.146 g
`liter-' h-1. It follows that a daily production of 80.6 g of
`biosurfactant resulted.
`The biomass concentration in the bioreactor (X) was 2.5 g
`liter-' (Table 1), giving a yield of biomass on glucose (Yx/s)
`of 85 mg of biomass per g of glucose. This is a low yield but
`indicates that the process is not designed for biomass pro-
`duction. Growth is limited by iron and nitrogen (4).
`The surface tension of the culture liquid was below 30 mN
`m-1, and the interfacial tension measured against a mixture
`of aliphatic hydrocarbons (chain length, C14 to C18) was
`below 0.5 mN m-1.
`A comparison of the data from the pilot plant with that of
`the laboratory scale is given in Table 1. It becomes apparent
`that the scale-up of the production process did not exces-
`sively change the performance of the system. On the labo-
`ratory scale, higher steady-state dilution rates were possible
`at which the organism still produced biosurfactants. On the
`pilot plant scale, steady states for biosurfactant and biomass
`production could be established up to a dilution rate of 0.08
`h-1. At higher dilution rates, the system was unstable, and
`washout of the culture occurred. This may be a consequence
`of the lower biomass yields observed in the pilot plant.
`Considering the differences between the cultivations on
`laboratory and pilot plant scales, iron content of the medium
`seems to be the most likely reason for this. On the laboratory
`scale, iron needed to be added to obtain steady-state condi-
`tions (4). Due to the fact that in the pilot plant all contain-
`ments were made of stainless steel (glass was used in the
`laboratory), iron could be omitted completely from the
`medium. Actually, iron introduced from the equipment and
`with the technical-grade chemicals seemed to be inhibitory
`for the cells in relation to the other medium components.
`With additional iron added, operation of the system at the
`dilution rate used here (0.065 h-1) was not possible. Washout
`of the culture occurred.
`Our data confirm that biosurfactant production is related
`to slowly growing cells (4). Wagner et al. (11) used resting or
`immobilized cells of P. aeruginosa for rhamnolipid produc-
`in accordance with the view that the
`tion. This is
`rhamnolipids are derived from the cell surface and have to be
`considered as secondary metabolites. Wagner et al. (11)
`reported somewhat higher product yields (Yp/s) when glyc-
`erol was the carbon source (approximately 100 mg g-1 of
`glycerol) and considerably higher product yields when n-
`alkanes served as the substrate in experiments with resting
`cells (230 mg g-1 alkanes). However, the productivity of the
`system was substantially lower when the long incubation
`periods (several days) are taken into account. The produc-
`tion of biosurfactants in continuous culture represents a
`most practicable system to control environmental aspects of
`
`PETITIONERS
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1030 Page 3 of 5
`
`

`

`988
`
`REILING ET AL.
`
`APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL.
`
`EzE
`
`-
`
`._
`
`-60
`
`~40,
`c_
`
`-
`
`A
`
`Regenerotion
`
`-_,
`
`I,
`
`CO
`
`- i.0-
`0
`4._
`2 0.8-
`
`CI
`
`C°
`
`D 0.6-
`
`0.4-
`
`i
`0
`
`2
`
`4
`
`6
`Bed volumes
`
`8
`
`I
`
`10
`
`so
`
`I
`
`12
`
`0C
`
`) 0.2-
`0-
`
`zI
`
`4-
`O- 4.0-
`
`B
`
`0I
`
`-
`20 CJ)
`
`. I
`
`EzE
`
`c0
`
`r(0
`r_
`
`CX
`0
`
`-60
`
`-
`
`- 40
`
`-20:
`a
`
`2 0.8-
`
`-CI
`
`V 0.6-
`8 0.4-
`0 0.2-
`0z 0
`
`6
`Bed volumes
`FIG. 2. Release of surface-active material from DEAE-Sepharose CL 6B after the first loading of the column (A) and after several
`regenerations (B).
`
`0
`
`4
`
`8
`
`10
`
`biosurfactant production and obviously allows efficient ex-
`ploitation of the potential of the cells.
`A problem of the continuous production process is the
`excessive foaming of the culture. The amount of foam is
`dependent on the initial glucose concentration and on the pH
`of the culture. It increases with both increasing glucose
`concentrations and increasing pH values. In the pilot plant,
`it was not possible to apply glucose concentrations higher
`than 30 g liter-', whereas, on the lab scale, glucose concen-
`trations of up to 70 g liter-' were used. Generally, the culture
`in the 50-liter bioreactor was more labile than the one in the
`5-liter bioreactor, most probably because the chemicals were
`of different purity and the materials for the containments
`were different from those used in the pilot plant. As a
`consequence, disturbances from excess foaming resulted in
`a decrease of biosurfactant production. Only with the con-
`ditions described and properly functioning process control
`could steady states be maintained for extended periods of
`time.
`Foam formation was decreased at pH values below 6,
`whereas the optimum for biosurfactant production was
`found to be at pH 6.25. Again, reliable pH control was
`necessary for avoiding disturbances of the steady-state pro-
`duction.
`Downstream processing. The adsorption on Amberlite
`XAD-2 proved to be the best method for the initial enrich-
`
`ment of the rhamnolipid biosurfactants on both laboratory
`and pilot plant scales. The flow rate to the column had to be
`adjusted according to the biosurfactant concentration and
`the degree of loading of the column. It varied between 10 and
`20 liters h-1. Clogging of the column during the loading
`procedure probably resulted from the fact that the cell-free
`culture liquid contained polysaccharide material which was
`also formed by the cells.
`The capacity of the resin for biosurfactant was calculated
`to be 60 g of surface-active material kg-' of XAD-2. The
`methanol eluate from this enrichment step contained on the
`average 60% pure active material. The elution volume of the
`active fractions amounted to 1 bed volume which corre-
`sponded to approximately 10 liters. Recovery of surface-
`active compounds on the pilot plant level from the adsorp-
`tion column was above 75%. The adsorption column was
`regenerated 15 to 20 times without losing efficiency or
`capacity.
`Anion-exchange chromatography on DEAE-Sepharose
`CL 6B was chosen as a further purification step. A specific
`enrichment is possible by this type of exchanger because
`rhamnolipids contain a carboxylic acid group. The elution of
`the surface-active compounds was elaborated on the labora-
`tory scale (Fig. 2). The material was released from the matrix
`with 0.6 M NaCl in a volume corresponding to approxi-
`mately 2 bed volumes. Regeneration of the column did not
`
`PETITIONERS
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1030 Page 4 of 5
`
`

`

`VOL. 51, 1986
`
`PILOT PLANT BIOSURFACTANT PRODUCTION
`
`989
`
`change the characteristics of the exchanger. On the pilot
`plant scale it was found that, with 0.6 M NaCl, too many bed
`volumes were required to release the active compounds.
`With the 0.8 M NaCI solution, the active material was
`released in 8 to 10 bed volumes. This increase in elution
`volume on the pilot plant scale was probably due to changing
`flow characteristics from the small to the larger scale.
`Furthermore, the capacity of the exchanger was more ex-
`hausted before elution in the pilot plant than in the labora-
`tory.
`Before elution, the column was flushed with 0.1 M NaCl to
`remove weakly bound products. Ion-exchange chromatogra-
`phy yielded an about 90% enriched product which was
`passed once more over an adsorption column (Amberlite
`XAD-2), and the biosurfactant was released with methanol.
`The solvent was evaporated, and the highly viscous residue
`was lyophilized. A slightly brownish powder resulted which
`was stored in a dessicator because the biosurfactants were
`highly hygroscopic.
`The anion-exchange chromatography proved to be the
`best method for further enrichment of the biosurfactants. It
`was, for example, superior to acid precipitation of the
`biosurfactant, which gave rise to higher losses. The recovery
`of the products from ion-exchange chromatography was
`over 90%. The binding capacity of the DEAE-Sepharose CL
`6B was approximately 50 g of biosurfactant per liter of gel.
`The disadvantages of ion-exchange chromatography con-
`cern the cost of the exchanger and the relatively low flow
`rates of about 6 liters h-' applicable. Further improvement
`should be possible by changing the design and packing of the
`column. On the laboratory scale, we also tried other ion-
`exchange materials (e.g., DEAE-Sephadex), but none of
`them was as well suited as DEAE-Sepharose with respect to
`elution and regeneration.
`The overall recovery of the surface-active compound by
`the methods described (centrifugation and three chromatog-
`raphy steps) was approximately 60%. This value also con-
`tains inaccuracies originating from the exact amount of the
`two rhamnolipids present in culture liquid. The calculations
`reported were based on rhamnose content and the relative
`amount of both rhamnolipids, which was determined in the
`early stages of the work to be of R-1 (one rhamnose unit) and
`of R-2 (two rhamnose units). The exact composition may
`have changed slightly, depending on the cultivation condi-
`tions and therefore, makes the significance of the calculated
`values only relative. Nevertheless, the methods elaborated
`
`proved to be applicable on the pilot plant level, and it was
`possible to demonstrate that large-scale extraction can be
`avoided in a production process for biosurfactants.
`
`ACKNOWLEDGMENT
`This work was financially supported by Petrotec Systems AG.
`
`LITERATURE CITED
`1. Edwards, J. R., and J. A. Hayashy. 1965. Structure of a
`rhamnolipid from Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Arch. Biochem.
`Biophys. 111:415-421.
`2. Einsele, A., and D. Karrer. 1980. Design and characterization of
`a completely filled bioreactor. Eur. J. Appl. Microbiol.
`Biotechnol. 9:83-91.
`3. Finnerty, W. R., and M. E. Singer. 1983. Microbial enhance-
`ment of oil recovery. Bio-technology 1:47-54.
`4. Guerra-Santos, L. H., 0. Kappeli, and A. Fiechter. 1984. Pseu-
`domonas aeruginosa biosurfactant production in continuous
`culture with glucose as carbon source. Appl. Environ. Micro-
`biol. 48:301-305.
`5. Hisatsuka, K., T. Nakahara, N. Sano, and K. Yamada. 1971.
`Formation of rhamnolipid by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and its
`function in hydrocarbon fermentation. Agr. Biol. Chem.
`35:686-692.
`6. Itoh, S., H. Honda, F. Tomita, and T. Suzuki. 1971. Rhamnolipid
`produced by Pseudomonas aeruginosa growth on n-paraffin. J.
`Antibiot. 24:855-859.
`7. Itoh, S., and T. Suzuki. 1972. Effect of rhamnolipids on growth
`of Pseudomonas aeruginosa mutant deficient in n-paraffin-
`utilizing ability. Agr. Biol. Chem. 36:2233-2235.
`8. Kosaric, N., N. C. C. Gray, and W. L. Cairus. 1983. Microbial
`emulsifiers and deemulsifiers, p. 575-592. In H. Dellweg (ed.),
`Biotechnology, vol. 3. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim, Federal Re-
`public of Germany.
`9. Reiling, H. E., H. Laurila, and A. Fiechter. 1985. Mass culture of
`Escherichia coli: Medium development for low and high density
`cultivation of Escherichia coli B/r in minimal and complex
`media. J. Biotechnol. 2:191-206.
`10. Syldatk, C., U. Matulovic, and F. Wagner. 1984. Biotenside-
`Neue Verfahren zur mikrobiellen Herstellung grenz-
`flachenaktiver anionischer Glykolipide. Biotechnol. Forum
`3:58-66.
`11. Wagner, F., J.-S. Kim, S. Long, Z.-Y. Li, G. Merwede, U.
`Matulovic, E. Ristau, and C. Syldatk. 1984. Production of
`surface active anionic glycolipids by resting and immobilized
`microbial cells, p. 1.3-1.8. In Dechema (ed.), Third European
`congress on biotechnology, vol. 1. Verlag Chemie, Weinheim,
`Federal Republic of Germany.
`
`PETITIONERS
`
`EXHIBIT NO. 1030 Page 5 of 5
`
`

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