Removal of microorganisms from fluid samples using nanofiber filtration media

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9750829
  • Patent Number
    9,750,829
  • Date Filed
    Friday, March 19, 2010
    14 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, September 5, 2017
    6 years ago
Abstract
A method for removing microorganisms from liquid samples and a nanofiber containing liquid filtration medium that simultaneously exhibits high liquid permeability and high microorganism retention. Microorganisms such as bacteria, particularly B. Diminuta, are removed from a liquid by passing the liquid through a porous nanofiber containing filtration medium having a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, and the nanofiber(s) has a diameter from about 10 nm to about 1,000 nm. Another method for removing microorganisms such as bacteria and Mycloplasma, includes passing the liquid through a porous nanofiber containing filtration medium having a microorganism LRV greater than about 8, and the nanofiber(s) has a diameter from about 10 nm to about 1,000 nm. The filtration medium can be in the form of a fibrous electro spun polymeric nanofiber liquid filtration medium mat.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to filtration media. In certain embodiments, the invention provides a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration mat, and methods of using the same in the retention of microorganism from a filtered liquid.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Filters used in liquid filtration can be generally categorized as either fibrous nonwoven media filters or porous film membrane filters.


Fibrous nonwoven liquid filtration media include, but are not limited to, nonwoven media formed from spunbonded, melt blown or spunlaced continuous fibers; hydroentangled nonwoven media formed from carded staple fiber and the like; or some combination of these types. Typically, fibrous nonwoven filter media filters used in liquid filtration have pore sizes generally greater than about 1 micron (μm).


Porous film membrane liquid filtration media is used either unsupported or used in conjunction with a porous substrate or support. Porous filtration membranes have pore sizes smaller than the fibrous nonwoven media, and typically have pore sizes less than about 1 μm. Porous film liquid filtration membranes can be used in: (a) microfiltration, wherein particulates filtered from a liquid are typically in the range of about 0.1 μm to about 10 μm; (b) ultrafiltration, wherein particulates filtered from a liquid, are typically in the range of about 5 nm to about 0.1 μm; and (c) reverse osmosis, wherein particulate matter filtered from a liquid, are typically in the range of about 1 Å to about 1 nm.


Fibrous nonwoven media and porous film membranes are each suitable for use in microfiltration. Microfiltration is widely accepted in industry as a reliable, easily scalable, and benign method to remove microorganisms, such as bacteria, from a fluid stream, and is an essential part of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical manufacturing. It is especially important in the biopharmaceutical industry, where microfiltration is used at multiple locations during biopharmaceutical processing.


However, in order to achieve particle retentions equivalent to pore sizes of less than about 1 μm using microfiltration with a fibrous nonwoven media, the number of layers of fibrous material in the filter needs to be increased in order to increase the depth of the nonwoven media. Increasing the number of fibrous layers in the nonwoven media produces both desirable and undesirably results. Increasing the number of fibrous layers produces desirable results by increased tortuosity of a defect path through which a contaminant particle must pass to escape capture by the filter media as well as increasing the contaminant-holding capacity of the filter media. However, increasing the number of fibrous layers in nonwoven media undesirably increases the pressure drop or differential pressure across the media when in use, which translates to increased energy for the filter user and a shorter filter lifespan.


Porous membrane filters used in microfiltration, unlike fibrous nonwoven media, offer a combination of good particle retention, pressure drop and flux, but also tend to be cost-prohibitive, and typically do not provide good contaminant-holding capacity over the entire range of pressure drop, therefore limiting the life of filters using porous membranes.


The two most desired features of a liquid microfiltration membrane are high permeability and reliable retention. Naturally, there is a trade-off between these two parameters, and for the same type of membrane, greater retention has historically been achieved by sacrificing permeability of the membrane. The inherent limitations of the conventional processes for making membranes prevents membranes from exceeding a certain threshold in porosity, and thus limits the magnitude of permeability that can be achieved at a given pore size.


A quantitative measure of microorganism retention by a filtration membrane is customarily expressed as a Log Reduction Value, or LRV. LRV is a logarithm of the ratio of particle concentration in the challenge solution to that in the filter effluent: LRV=Log{[CFU]challenge/[CFU]effluent}


In the case when the filter retains all microorganisms under the conditions of the test, it is customary to report the LRV as greater than the value obtained when a single microorganism passes the filter. For example, at the challenge particle concentration of 4.77*107CFU/cm.2, the maximum measurable LRV is 8.22. When no particles pass the filter, the LRV is reported as greater than 8.22.


Pore size rating of a membrane is an indicator that the membrane has successfully passed a relevant, standardized bacterial challenge test. The most common pore size rating is 0.22 μm, which is assigned to membranes that pass a Standard Test Method for Determining Bacterial Retention Of Membrane Filters Utilized For Liquid Filtration (ASTM F838-83 test), can be validated to produce sterile effluent after being challenged with ≧107 CFU/cm2 Brevundimonas diminuta.



Brevundimonas diminuta (ATCC #19146), formerly known as Pseudomonas diminuta, is an aerobic gram-negative bacteria (bacilli). Because of its small size, B. diminuta is a standard microbial organism for validation of membrane filters and the like for sterilization. However, while B. diminuta is representative of most pathogenic bacteria, B. diminuta has proved to be a poor model for a class of microorganisms called Mycoplasma. While representative of most pathogenic bacteria, B. diminuta has proved to be a poor model for a class of microorganisms called Mycoplasma.



Mycoplasma is a microorganism that can infect cell cultures and can have a substantially deleterious effect to biopharmaceutical manufacturing. The contamination of eukaryotic cell cultures and the like with Mycoplasma is also a common problem, leading to unreliable experimental results and possibly unsafe biological products. This represents a serious problem for manufacturers involved in the development and fabrication of biological and pharmaceutical products. The highly nutritive environment of the media used in cell culture can lead to the propagation of Mycoplasmas, resulting in diminished cell growth as well as the loss of cultures. In contrast to contamination with types of bacteria which can be detected in a short period after infection on the basis of visible effects such as cytopathicity, pH change, abnormal growth, or the media appearing turbid, contamination caused by Mycoplasma may go undetected without noticeable symptoms (Razin, S. 1997. Comparative genomics of Mycoplasmas. Wien Klin Wochenschr 109:551-6. Jung H. Wang S Y, Yang I W, Hsuch D W, Yang W J, Wang T H, Wang: H S. (2003) Detection and treatment of Mycoplasma contamination in cultured cells. Chang Gung Med J. 26: 250-8. Wisher M. (2002) Biosafety and product release testing issues relevant to replication-competent oncolytic viruses, Review. Cancer Gene Ther. 9: 1056-61).


A membrane pore size rating of 0.1 μm indicates that a membrane has been validated to remove Mycoplasma. (See, Roche, K. L.: Levy, R. V., Methods to Validate Microporous Membranes for the Removal of Mycoplasma, BioPharm 1992, 5, (3), 22-33)


For example, membranes having a pore size rating of 0.1 um can be used to filter media, nutrient and cell culture fluid delivered to cells living and growing inside of a bioreactor. Membranes currently exist that have a specific Log Reduction Value (LRV) for A. Laidawii, a test microorganism for Mycoplasma. While it is customarily accepted that LRV>8 is sufficient to claim “full” retention of Mycoplasma, filters having a lower LRV are often used instead in liquid filtration because of greater permeability and higher throughput.


WO/2009/032040, assigned to Millipore Corporation and titled, SERUM-FREE GROWTH MEDIUM FOR ACHOLEPLASMA LAIDLAWII AND METHODS FOR RETENTION TESTING STERILIZING GRADE FILTERS, fully incorporated by reference herein in its entirety, teaches the full retention of Mycoplasma by a filtration medium can be validated to produce sterile effluent after being challenged with ≧1 109×cfu/mL Acholeplasma laidlawii (A. laidlawii; ATCC 23206).


For example, two membranes having a pore size rating of 0.1 μm, Durapore® VV and Express SHR, each available from Millipore Corporation, Billerica, Mass., USA, have Mycoplasma LRVs of 4 and 6, respectively. While Durapore® MV, also available from Millipore Corporation, claims full Mycoplasma retention (LRV>8), it has a lower permeability and capacity in media filtration compared to Durapore® VV and Express SHR.


Synthetic polymers have been formed into webs of very small diameter fibers, i.e., on the order of a few micrometers or less than 1 μm, using various processes including melt blowing, electrostatic spinning and electroblowing. Such webs have been shown to be useful as liquid barrier materials and filters. Often they are combined with stronger sheets to form composites, wherein the stronger sheets provide the strength to meet the needs of the final filter product.


U.S. Patent Publication Number 2004/0038014 issued to Schaefer et al. teaches a nonwoven filtration mat comprising one or more layers of a thick collection of fine polymeric microfibers and nanofibers formed by electrostatic spinning for filtering contaminants. The electrostatic spinning process utilizes an electro spinning apparatus including a reservoir in which the fine fiber forming polymer solution is contained, a pump and an emitter device which obtains polymer solution from the reservoir. In the electrostatic field, a droplet of the polymer solution is accelerated by the electrostatic field toward a collecting media substrate located on a grid. A high voltage electrostatic potential is maintained between the emitter and grid, with the collection substrate positioned there between, by means of a suitable electrostatic voltage source.


The “electroblowing” process is disclosed in World Patent Publication No. WO 03/080905, incorporated herein by reference in its entirety. A stream of polymeric solution comprising a polymer and a solvent is fed from a storage tank to a series of spinning nozzles within a spinneret, to which a high voltage is applied and through which the polymeric solution is discharged. Meanwhile, compressed air that is optionally heated is issued from air nozzles disposed in the sides of, or at the periphery of the spinning nozzle. The air is directed generally downward as a blowing gas stream which envelopes and forwards the newly issued polymeric solution and aids in the formation of the fibrous web, which is collected on a grounded porous collection belt above a vacuum chamber. The electroblowing process permits formation of commercial sizes and quantities of nanowebs at basis weights in excess of about 1 gsm, even as high as about 40 gsm or greater, in a relatively short time period.


U.S. Patent Publication Number 2007/0075015 issued to Bates et al. teaches a liquid filtration media including at least one layer of nanofibers having average diameters less than 1,000 nanometers optionally disposed on scrim layer for filtering particulate matter in a liquid. The filtration media have flow rates of at least 0.055 L/min/cm2 at relatively high levels of solidity. The media apparently has non-diminishing flow rates as differential pressures increase between 2 psi (14 kPa) and 15 psi (100 kPa).


U.S. Patent Publication Number 2007/0018361 issued to Xu teaches fabricating nanofibers by reactive electrospinning, wherein the electrospinning process is coupled with an in-line reactor where chemical or photochemical reactions take place. The processes taught in Xu use electrospinning to allow for the production of nanofibers from crosslinked polymers and other materials.


U.S. Patent Publication Number 2009/0026137 issued to issued to Chen teaches fabricating liquid filter with a composite medium that has a nanoweb adjacent to and optionally bonded to a microporous membrane. The membrane is characterized by an LRV value of 3.7 at a rated particle size, and the nanoweb has a fractional filtration efficiency of greater than 0.1 at the rated particle size of the membrane. The nanoweb also has a thickness efficiency ratio of greater than 0.0002 at that efficiency. The nanoweb acts to provide depth filtration to the membrane.


It would be desirable to have a reliable electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a microorganism LRV greater than about 8, suitable for full retention of microorganisms such as bacteria, Mycoplasma in particular, and/or a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, suitable for full retention of B. Diminuta, when removed from a liquid passing through the filtration medium, while simultaneously achieving high permeability and high throughput.


Additionally, the porous electrospun nanofiber filtration medium would be readily scalable, adaptable to processing volumes of sample fluids ranging from milliliters to thousands of liters, and capable of use with a variety of filtration processes and devices. The invention is directed to these, as well as other objectives and embodiments.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed to a method of removing microorganisms from a liquid by passing the liquid through a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium. The electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium can be used with or without being disposed on a porous support or substrate. The electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium can be formed into a variety of shapes, sizes, thicknesses and densities, such as a porous, polymeric nanofiber mat.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, and the nanofiber(s) has an average fiber diameter ranging from about 10 nm to about 1000 nm.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, and the filtration medium has a porosity ranging from about 80% to about 95%.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 4, and a liquid permeability at 10 psi differential pressure greater than about 3,000 LMH. (Liters Per Square Meter Per Hour).


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and a liquid permeability at 10 psi differential pressure greater than about 3,000 LMH.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, and formed as a fibrous porous mat having a thickness ranging from about 1 μm to about 500 μm.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a B. Diminuta LRV greater than about 9, and a liquid permeability at 10 psi differential pressure greater than about 10,000 LMH.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and the nanofiber(s) has an average fiber diameter ranging from about 10 nm to about 1,000 nm.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and a liquid permeability at 10 psi differential pressure greater than about 3,000 LMH.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and the filtration medium has a porosity ranging from about 80% to about 95%.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and formed as a fibrous porous mat having a thickness ranging from about 1 μm to about 500 μm.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed towards a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration medium having a Mycoplasma LRV greater than about 8, and a liquid permeability at 10 psi differential pressure greater than about 10,000 LMH.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to a process for forming a porous filtration medium from one or more electrospun polymeric nanofibers from a polymer solution by using an electrospinning apparatus, and subjecting the solution to an electric potential greater than about 10 kV, and collecting electrospun polymer fiber(s) as a non-woven mat.


In another embodiment, the present invention is directed to a composite porous filtration device comprising a filtration medium having a microorganism LRV greater than about 8, and including an electrospun polymeric nanofiber mat disposed on a porous support or porous substrate.


Additional features and advantages of the invention will be set forth in the detailed description and claims, which follows. Many modifications and variations of this invention can be made without departing from its spirit and scope, as will be apparent to those skilled in the art. It is to be understood that the foregoing general description and the following detailed description, the claims, as well as the appended drawings are exemplary and explanatory only, and are intended to provide an explanation of various embodiments of the present teachings. The specific embodiments described herein are offered by way of example only and are not meant to be limiting in any way.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this specification, illustrate the presently contemplated embodiments of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention.



FIG. 1 is a schematic of the process of electrospinning a nonfiber according to one embodiment of the invention. Polymer solution 10, rotating drum 20, moving collecting belt 30, ground electrode 35, high voltage source 40, polymer fibers produced by electric field 50, fiber mat 60 formed from polymer fibers.



FIG. 2 is a cross-sectional scanning electron micrograph of nylon fibers from an embodiment of the invention exemplified in Example 1.



FIG. 3 is a frontal scanning electron micrograph of nylon fibers from an embodiment of the invention exemplified in Example 1.



FIG. 4 is a scanning electron micrograph of nylon fibers from another embodiment of the invention as exemplified in Example 2



FIG. 5 is a scanning electron micrograph of a symmetrical commercial membrane Durapore® MVPP from Comparative Example 1.



FIG. 6 is a scanning electron micrograph of a symmetrical commercial membrane Durapore® GVPP from Comparative Example 2.





DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTS

All publications, patents and patent applications cited herein, whether supra or infra, are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety to the same extent as if each individual publication, patent or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference.


For the purposes of this specification and appended claims, unless otherwise indicated, all numbers expressing quantities of ingredients, percentages or proportions of materials, reaction conditions, and other numerical values used in the specification and claims, are to be understood as being modified in all instances by the term “about”.


Accordingly, unless indicated to the contrary, the numerical parameters set forth in the following specification and attached claims are approximations that may vary depending upon the desired properties sought to be obtained by the present invention. At the very least, and not as an attempt to limit the application of the doctrine of equivalents to the scope of the claims, each numerical parameter should at least be construed in light of the number of reported significant digits and by applying ordinary rounding techniques.


Notwithstanding that the numerical ranges and parameters setting forth the broad scope of the invention are approximations, the numerical values set forth in the specific examples are reported as precisely as possible. Any numerical value, however, inherently contains certain errors necessarily resulting from the standard deviation found in their respective testing measurements. Moreover, all ranges disclosed herein are to be understood to encompass all subranges subsumed therein. For example, a range of “1 to 10” includes any and all subranges between (and including) the minimum value of 1 and the maximum value of 10, that is, any and all subranges having a minimum value of equal to or greater than 1 and a maximum value of equal to or less than 10, e.g., 5.5 to 10.


Before describing the present invention in further detail, a number of terms will be defined. Use of these terms does not limit the scope of the invention but only serve to facilitate the description of the invention.


As used herein, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” include plural referents unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.


The term “nanofibers” refers to fibers having diameters varying from a few tens of nanometers up to several hundred nanometers, but generally less than one micrometer.


The terms “filter medium” or “filter media” refer to a material, or collection of material, through which a fluid carrying a microorganism contaminant passes, wherein microorganism is deposited in or on the material or collection of material.


The terms “flux” and “flow rate” are used interchangeably to refer to the rate at which a volume of fluid passes through a filtration medium of a given area.


The filtration medium of the present invention includes a porous electrospun nanofiber liquid filtration mat. The nanofibers have an average fiber diameter of about 10 nm to about 1000 nm. The filtration medium has a mean pore size ranging from about 0.1 μm to about 1 μm. The filtration medium has a porosity ranging from about 80% to about 95%. The filtration medium has a thickness ranging from about 1 μm to about 500 μm, preferably from about 50 μm and about 200 μm. The filtration medium has liquid permeability greater than about 300 LMH/psi.


Polymers suitable for use in the nanofibers of the invention include thermoplastic and thermosetting polymers. Suitable polymers include, but are not limited to, nylon, polyimide, aliphatic polyamide, aromatic polyamide, polysulfone, cellulose, cellulose acetate, polyether sulfone, polyurethane, poly(urea urethane), polybenzimidazole, polyetherimide, polyacrylonitrile, poly(ethylene terephthalate), polypropylene, polyaniline, poly(ethylene oxide), poly(ethylene naphthalate), poly(butylene terephthalate), styrene butadiene rubber, polystyrene, poly(vinyl chloride), poly(vinyl alcohol), poly(vinylidene fluoride), poly(vinyl butylene), copolymers, derivative compounds and blends thereof, and combinations thereof.


The process for making the electrospun nanofiber mat of the filtration medium is disclosed in WO 2005/024101; WO 2006/131081; and WO 2008/106903, all assigned to Elmarco S. R. O., of Liberec, Czech Republic.


In one embodiment of the present invention, the filtration medium comprises a mat made from a single nanofiber, wherein the single nanofiber is made by a single pass of a moving collection apparatus positioned between the spinning drum and the collector through the process. It will be appreciated that the fibrous web can be formed by one or more spinning drums running simultaneously above the same moving collection apparatus.


In one embodiment of the invention, a fibrous mat is made by depositing nanofiber (s) from a nylon solution. The nanofiber mat has a basis weight of between about 5 g/m2 and about 15 g/m2, as measured on a dry basis, i.e., after the residual solvent has evaporated or been removed.


As depicted in FIG. 1, a moving collection apparatus 30 is preferably a moving collection belt positioned within the electrostatic field between the rotating drum 20 and the ground electrode 35, wherein the porous mat made from a single nanofiber is collected.


In one embodiment of the invention, any of a variety of porous single or multilayered substrates or supports can be arranged on a moving collection belt to collect and combine with the electrospun nanofiber mat medium, forming a composite filtration device.


Examples of single or multilayered porous substrates or supports include, but are not limited to, spunbonded nonwovens, meltblown nonwovens, needle punched nonwovens, spunlaced nonwovens, wet laid nonwovens, resin-bonded nonwovens, woven fabrics, knit fabrics, paper, and combinations thereof.


In another embodiment of the invention, the electrospun nanofiher mat medium taught herein may be bonded to a porous substrate or support. Bonding may be accomplished by known methods in the art, including but not limited to thermal calendaring between heated smooth nip rolls, ultrasonic bonding, and through gas bonding. Bonding increases the strength and the compression resistance of the medium so that the medium may withstand the forces associated with being handled, being formed into a useful filter, and being used in a filter, and depending on the bonding method used, adjusts physical properties such as thickness, density, and the size and shape of the pores.


For instance, thermal calendering can be used to reduce the thickness and increase the density and reduce the porosity of the electrospun nanofiber mat medium, and reduce the size of the pores. This in turn decreases the flow rate through the medium at a given applied differential pressure. In general, ultrasonic bonding will bond to a smaller area of the electrospun nanofiber mat medium than thermal calendering, and therefore has a lesser effect on thickness, density and pore size. Though gas bonding generally has minimal effect on thickness, density and pore size, therefore this bonding method may be preferable in applications in which maintaining higher fluid flow rate is desired.


When thermal calendering is used, care must be taken not to over-bond the electrospun nanofiber material, such that the nanofibers melt and no longer retain their structure as individual fibers. In the extreme, over-bonding would result in the nanofibers melting completely such that a film would be formed. One or both of the nip rolls used is heated to a temperature of between about ambient temperature, e.g., about 25° C. and about 300° C. The nanofiber mat(s) and/or porous support or substrate, can be compressed between the nip rolls at a pressure ranging from about 0 lb/in to about 1000 lb/in (178 kg/cm). The nanofiber mat(s) can be compressed at a line speed of at least about 10 ft/min (3 m/min).


Calendering conditions, e.g., roll temperature, nip pressure and line speed, can be adjusted to achieve the desired solidity. In general, application of higher temperature, pressure, and/or residence time under elevated temperature and/or pressure results in increased solidity.


Other mechanical steps, such as stretching, cooling, heating, sintering, annealing, reeling, unreeling, and the like, may optionally be included in the overall process of forming, shaping and making the electrospun nanofiber mat medium as desired.


For example, the electrospun nanofiber mat medium taught herein may be stretched in a single step or a plurality of steps as desired. Depending on the stretching method used to stretch the electrospun nanofiber mat medium, stretching can adjust the physical properties of the mat including thickness, density, and the size and shape of the pores formed in the mat. For example, if the electrospun nanofiber mat is stretched in a single direction (uniaxial stretching), the stretching may be accomplished by a single stretching step or a sequence of stretching steps until the desired final stretch ratio is attained.


Similarly, if the electrospun nanofiber mat medium is stretched in two directions (biaxial stretching), the stretching can be conducted by a single biaxial stretching step or a sequence of biaxial stretching steps until the desired final stretch ratios are attained. Biaxial stretching may also be accomplished by a sequence of one or more uniaxial stretching steps in one direction and one or more uniaxial stretching steps in another direction. Biaxial stretching steps where the electrospun nanofiber mat is stretched simultaneously in two directions and uniaxial stretching steps may be conducted in sequence in any order.


Methods for stretching the mat are not particularly limited, and use may be made of ordinary tentering, rolling, or inflation or a combination of two or more of these. The stretching may be conducted uniaxially, biaxially, etc. In the case of biaxial stretching, machine-direction stretching and transverse-direction stretching may be conducted either simultaneously or successively.


Various types of stretching apparatus are well known in the art and may be used to accomplish stretching of the electrospun mat according to the present invention. Uniaxial stretching is usually accomplished by stretching between two rollers wherein the second or downstream roller rotates at a greater peripheral speed than the first or upstream roller. Uniaxial stretching can also be accomplished on a standard tentering machine.


Biaxial stretching may be accomplished by simultaneously stretching in two different directions on a tentering machine. More commonly, however, biaxial stretching is accomplished by first uniaxially stretching between two differentially rotating rollers as described above, followed by either uniaxially stretching in a different direction using a tenter machine or by biaxially stretching using a tenter machine. The most common type of biaxial stretching is where the two stretching directions are approximately at right angles to each other. In most cases where a continuous sheet is being stretched, one stretching direction is at least approximately parallel to the long axis of the sheet (machine direction) and the other stretching direction is at least approximately perpendicular to the machine direction and is in the plane of the sheet (transverse direction).


After the electrospun nanofiber mat has been stretched either uniaxially or biaxially, the stretched porous electrospun nanofiber mat can again be calendared. The stretched electrospun nanofiber mat can be forwarded to a pair of heated calendar rolls acting cooperatively so as to form a mat of reduced thickness compared to the mat exiting from the stretching apparatus. By regulating the pressure exerted by these calendar rolls along with the temperature, the pore size of the final electrospun nanofiber mat can be controlled as desired, thereby allowing for the adjustment of the average pore size.


The electrospun nanofiber mat may be heated by any of a wide variety of techniques prior to, during, and/or after stretching. Examples of these techniques include radiative heating such as that provided by electrically heated or gas fired infrared heaters, convective heating such as that provided by recirculating hot air, and conductive heating such as that provided by contact with heated rolls. The temperatures which are measured for temperature control purposes may vary according to the apparatus used and personal preference.


In general, the temperature or temperatures can be controlled such that the electrospun nanofiber mat is stretched about evenly so that the variations, if any, in thickness of the stretched mat are within acceptable limits and so that the amount of stretched microporous electrospun nanofiber mat outside of those limits is acceptably low. It will be apparent that the temperatures used for control purposes may or may not be close to those of the electrospun nanofiber mat itself since they depend upon the nature of the apparatus used, the locations of the temperature-measuring devices, and the identities of the substances or objects whose temperatures are being measured.


The porosity can be modified as a result of calendering. The range of porosity from about 5% to about 90% can be obtained.


While filtration medium is often used in single-layer configuration, it is sometimes advantageous to provide more than one layer of filtration medium adjacent to each other. Layering membrane filters to improve particle retention is commonly used in virus filtration and is practiced commercially in Millipore's product lines of Viresolve® NFP and Viresolve Pro®. Layering filtration media of the same or different composition is also used to improve filter throughput. Examples of such layered filters are Millipore's Express® SHC and SHRP product lines. Other considerations for choosing a multi-layered filtration product include economics and convenience of media and device manufacturing, ease of sterilization and validation. The fibrous filtration media of the present invention can be used in single-layer or in a multi-layer configuration.


Test Methods


Basis Weight was determined by ASTM D-3776, which is hereby incorporated by reference and reported in g/m2.


Porosity was calculated by dividing the basis weight of the sample in g/m2 by the polymer density in g/cm3, by the sample thickness in micrometers, multiplying by 100, and subtracting the resulting number from 100, i.e., porosity=100−[basis weight/(density.times.thickness).times.100].


Fiber Diameter was determined as follows. Ten scanning electron microscope (SEM) images at 40,000 times magnification was taken of each nanofiber layer sample. The diameter of ten (10) clearly distinguishable nanofibers were measured from each SEM image and recorded. Defects were not included (i.e., lumps of nanofibers, polymer drops, intersections of nanofibers), The average fiber diameter for each sample was calculated.


Thickness was determined by ASTM D1777-64, which is hereby incorporated by reference, and is reported in micrometers.


Mean flow bubble point was measured according to ASTM Designation E 1294-89, “Standard Test Method for Pore Size Characteristics of Membrane Filters Using Automated Liquid Porosimeter” by using automated bubble point method from ASTM Designation F 316 using a custom-built capillary flow porosimeter, in principle similar to a commercial apparatus from Porous Materials, Inc. (PMI), Ithaca, N.Y. Individual samples of 47 mm in diameter (9.6 cm2 measurable area) were wetted with isopropyl alcohol. Each sample was placed in a holder, and a differential pressure of air was applied and the fluid removed from the sample. The differential pressure at which wet flow is equal to one-half the dry flow (flow without wetting solvent) is used to calculate the mean flow pore size using supplied software.


Flow Rate (also referred to as Flux) is the rate at which fluid passes through the sample of a given area and was measured by passing deionized water through filter medium samples having a diameter of 35 mm. The water was forced through the samples using hydraulic pressure (water head pressure) or pneumatic pressure (air pressure over water).


The effective pore size of an electrospun mat can be measured using conventional membrane techniques such as bubble point, liquid-liquid porometry, and challenge test with particles of certain size. It is known that the effective pore size of a fibrous mat generally increases with the fiber diameter and decreases with porosity.


Bubble point test provides a convenient way to measure effective pore size. It is calculated from the following equation:







P
=



2

γ

r


cos





θ


,





where P is the bubble point pressure, γ is the surface tension of the probe fluid, r is the pore radius, and θ is the liquid-solid contact angle.


Membrane manufacturers assign nominal pore size ratings to commercial membrane filters, which are based on their retention characteristics.


While it is known that the pore size distribution of a random non-woven mat becomes narrower as thickness of the mat increases (See, Meltzer, T. H., In Filtration in the Pharmaceutical Industry, Marcel Dekker: New York, 1987; p 103), it has not been previously shown whether the pore size distribution of a non-woven mat can be sufficiently narrow to accomplish “full bacteria retention” (as discussed supra) at competitive permeability of at least 100 LMH/psi for Mycoplasma-retentive filters and 500 LMH/psi for B. Diminuta-retentive filters.



Mycoplasma retention was measured by challenging the membranes with 8.77*107 colony forming units per square cm of membrane (CFU/cm2). The devices are challenged with 50 mL of diluted A. laidlawii and then flushed with 50 mL of Mycoplasma Buffer for a total of 100 mL. The full 100 mL was then filtered through a 0.22 μm sterilization membrane. Then, the procedure described in a published patent application WO 2009/032040 was followed.



B. Diminuta retention was measured in accordance with ASTM F838-83.


The following Examples of the present invention will demonstrate that an electrospun nanofiber mat can possess both high permeability and high bacteria retention at the same time.


Hereinafter the present invention will be described in more detail in the following examples. The invention will be further clarified by the following examples which are intended to be exemplary of the invention.


EXAMPLES
Example 1

An electrospinning process and apparatus for forming a nanofiber web as disclosed in WO 2006/131081 was used to produce the nanofiber layers and mats of the Examples below.


Nanofiber layers were made by electrospinning a solution of Nylon 6 polymer. Nylon 6 was supplied by BASF Corp., Florham Park, N.J., USA, under the trademark Ultramid B24. A solvent mixture of acetic and formic acid, weight ratio 2:1, was used to prepare solutions of Nylon, with concentrations ranging from 8 to 16%.


A 10 wt.% solution of Nylon was electrospun at 82 kV and distance between solution and ground electrode 155 mm, for 45 minutes. By way of example only, samples were tested for A. Laidiawii retention using standard Millipore procedures described above. A representative sample is compared to the closest Durapore® membrane, MVPP, in Table I below.


The results are shown in Table I below.
















TABLE I









Mean flow








bubble
Nominal





point
pore size



Thickness
Permeability
for IPA
rating
Porosity

A. Laidlawii




(micron)
(LMH/psi)
(psi)
(micron)
(%)
LRV






















Example 1:
140
400
65
N/A
88
>8.6


Electrospun


Nylon 140


Comparative
125
80
55
0.1
70
>8.6


Example 1:


Millipore


Durapore ®


MVPP









Example 2

A series of Nylon 6 electrospun fibrous mats were prepared as described in Example 1. A 13 wt. % solution of Nylon was electrospun at 82 kV and distance between solution and ground electrode 155 mm, for 10 and 45 minutes. Fiber mats of 55 and 225 microns thick were produced for the two spin times, respectively. These samples were tested, by way of example only, for B. Diminuta retention. It should be noted that the Mycoplasma-retentive electrospun fibrous mats as taught herein are used for the full retention of B. Diminuta.


Example 3

Another series of Nylon 6 electrospun fibrous mats were prepared as described in Example 2. A 16 wt. % solution of Nylon was electrospun at 82 kV and distance between solution and ground electrode 155 mm, for 15 minutes. These samples were tested, by way of example only, for B. Diminuta retention.


The results are shown in Table II below.
















TABLE II









Mean flow
Nominal







bubble
pore size



Thickness
Permeability
point for
rating
Porosity

B. Diminuta




(micron)
(LMH/psi)
IPA (psi)
(micron)
(%)
LRV






















Example 2:
225
1,814
33
N/A
90
>9


Nylon 225


Example 2:
55
4,960
26
N/A
90
>9


Nylon 55


Example 3:
106
3,354
13.7
N/A
90
5.5


Nylon 55


Comparative
125
500
30
0.22
75
>9


Example


2: Millipore


Durapore ®


GVPP









A higher porosity of electrospun nanofiber mats results in greater permeability, while still providing a reliable means for retention of microorganisms.


Method of Use


Electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration media, in accordance with the present invention are useful in the food, beverage, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, microelectronics, chemical processing, water treatment, and other liquid treatment industries.


Electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration media, in accordance with the present invention may be used for filtering, separating, identifying, and/or detecting microorganisms from a liquid sample or stream.


Electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration media, in accordance with the present invention may be used with any liquid sample preparation methods including, but not limited to, chromatography; high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC); electrophoresis; gel filtration; sample centrifugation; on-line sample preparation; diagnostic kits testing; diagnostic testing; high throughput screening; affinity binding assays; purification of a liquid sample; size-based separation of the components of the fluid sample; physical properties based separation of the components of the fluid sample; chemical properties based separation of the components of the fluid sample; biological properties based separation of the components of the fluid sample; electrostatic properties based separation of the components of the fluid sample; and, combinations thereof. Also, electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration media, in accordance with the present invention can be component or part of a larger device and/or system.


Kits


The invention also provides kits which may be used to remove microorganisms from a liquid sample. The kit may comprise, for example, one or more electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration medium in accordance with the present invention, as well as one or more liquid filtration devices, support or substrate for the medium. The kit may contain one or more controls, and may optionally include various buffers useful in the methods of practicing the invention. Wash buffers for eliminating reagents or eliminating non-specifically retained or bound material may optionally be included in the kit.


Other optional kit reagents include an elution buffer. Each of the buffers may be provided in a separate container as a solution. Alternatively the buffers may be provided in dry form or as a powder and may be made up as a solution according to the user's desired application. In this case the buffers may be provided in packets. The kit may provide a power source in instances where the device is automated as well as a means of providing an external force such as a vacuum pump. The kit may also include instructions for using the electrospun nanofiber containing liquid filtration medium, device, support or substrate, and/or for making up reagents suitable for use with the invention, and methods of practicing invention. Optional software for recording and analyzing data obtained while practicing the methods of the invention or while using the device of the invention may also be included.


The term “kit” includes, for example, each of the components combined in a single package, the components individually packaged and sold together, or the components presented together in a catalog (e.g., on the same page or double-page spread in the catalog).


The disclosure set forth above may encompass multiple distinct inventions with independent utility. Although each of these inventions has been disclosed in its preferred form(s), the specific embodiments thereof as disclosed and illustrated herein are not to be considered in a limiting sense, because numerous variations are possible. The subject matter of the inventions includes all novel and nonobvious combinations and subcombinations of the various elements, features, functions, and/or properties disclosed herein. The following claims particularly point out certain combinations and subcombinations regarded as novel and nonobvious. Inventions embodied in other combinations and subcombinations of features, functions, elements, and/or properties may be claimed in applications claiming priority from this or a related application. Such claims, whether directed to a different invention or to the same invention, and whether broader, narrower, equal, or different in scope to the original claims, also are regarded as included within the subject matter of the inventions of the present disclosure.

Claims
  • 1. A method of removing-bacteria from a liquid sample comprising the steps of: a) providing a liquid sample containing bacteria,b) providing a porous nanofiber containing filtration medium made by electrospinning a polymer, and wherein the filtration medium exhibits full retention of Brevundimonas diminuta as measured in accordance with ASTM F838-83, a porosity from about 80% to about 95%, and a liquid permeability greater than about 1000 LMH/psi, wherein the nanofiber has a fiber diameter from about 10 nm to about 1,000 nm, andc) passing the liquid sample containing bacteria through the filtration medium resulting in the full retention of bacteria by size-based separation.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the filtration medium has a thickness ranging from about 1μm to about 500 μm.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the polymer is selected from the group consisting of polyimide, aliphatic polyamide, aromatic polyamide, polysulfone, cellulose acetate, polyether sulfone, polyurethane, poly(urea urethane), polybenzimidazole, polyetherimide, polyacrylonitrile, poly(ethylene terephthalate), polypropylene, polyaniline, poly(ethylene oxide), poly(ethylene naphthalate), poly(butylene terephthalate), styrene butadiene rubber, polystyrene, poly(vinyl chloride), poly(vinyl alcohol), poly(vinylidene fluoride), poly(vinyl butylene) and copolymers, derivative compounds, or blends thereof.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the polymer comprises an aliphatic polyamide.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the polymer comprises a blend of polymers or copolymers.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the nanofiber is disposed on a porous support.
  • 7. The method of claim 6, wherein the porous support comprises one or more layers selected from the group consisting of spunbonded nonwovens, meltblown nonwovens, needle punched nonwovens, spunlaced nonwovens, wet laid nonwovens, resin-bonded nonwovens, woven fabrics, knit fabrics, paper, and combinations thereof.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the porosity is about 90%.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional patent Application No. 61/210,468, filed on Mar. 19, 2009.

PCT Information
Filing Document Filing Date Country Kind 371c Date
PCT/US2010/000826 3/19/2010 WO 00 12/6/2011
Publishing Document Publishing Date Country Kind
WO2010/107503 9/23/2010 WO A
US Referenced Citations (226)
Number Name Date Kind
692631 Cooley Feb 1902 A
705691 Morton Jul 1902 A
1699615 Hagiwara Jan 1929 A
1975504 Formhals Oct 1934 A
2048651 Norton Jul 1936 A
2158415 Formhals May 1939 A
2158416 Formhals May 1939 A
2160962 Formhals Jun 1939 A
2168027 Gladding Aug 1939 A
2349950 Formhals May 1944 A
3585126 Cannon et al. Jun 1971 A
3620970 Klug et al. Nov 1971 A
3864289 Rendall Feb 1975 A
3994258 Simm Nov 1976 A
4043331 Martin et al. Aug 1977 A
4069026 Simm et al. Jan 1978 A
4127706 Martin et al. Nov 1978 A
4143196 Simm et al. Mar 1979 A
4261834 deWinter Apr 1981 A
4323525 Bornat Apr 1982 A
4510047 Thompson Apr 1985 A
4604326 Manabe et al. Aug 1986 A
4629563 Wrasidlo Dec 1986 A
4650506 Barris et al. Mar 1987 A
4657793 Fisher Apr 1987 A
4704324 Davis et al. Nov 1987 A
4778601 Lopatin et al. Oct 1988 A
4824568 Allegrezza, Jr. et al. Apr 1989 A
4839203 Davis et al. Jun 1989 A
4853129 Wan Aug 1989 A
4938869 Bayerlein et al. Jul 1990 A
4983288 Karbachsch et al. Jan 1991 A
5228994 Tkacik et al. Jul 1993 A
5500167 Degen Mar 1996 A
5522601 Murphy Jun 1996 A
5522991 Tuccelli et al. Jun 1996 A
5652050 Pall et al. Jul 1997 A
5731164 Becker et al. Mar 1998 A
5739316 Beer et al. Apr 1998 A
5846438 Pall et al. Dec 1998 A
5968650 Tennent et al. Oct 1999 A
5985112 Fischer Nov 1999 A
6074869 Pall et al. Jun 2000 A
6113794 Kumar et al. Sep 2000 A
6153098 Bayerlein et al. Nov 2000 A
6321915 Wilson et al. Nov 2001 B1
6554881 Healey Apr 2003 B1
6598749 Paul et al. Jul 2003 B2
6604925 Dubson Aug 2003 B1
6713011 Chu et al. Mar 2004 B2
6743273 Chung et al. Jun 2004 B2
6746517 Benson et al. Jun 2004 B2
6770204 Koslow Aug 2004 B1
6835311 Koslow Dec 2004 B2
6858057 Healey Feb 2005 B2
6866704 Koslow Mar 2005 B2
6872311 Koslow Mar 2005 B2
6913154 Koslow Jul 2005 B2
6924028 Chung et al. Aug 2005 B2
6953604 Koslow Oct 2005 B2
6955775 Chung et al. Oct 2005 B2
6959820 Koslow Nov 2005 B2
6974490 Gillingham et al. Dec 2005 B2
6994811 Kools Feb 2006 B2
6998058 Koslow Feb 2006 B2
7008465 Graham et al. Mar 2006 B2
7008537 Koslow Mar 2006 B2
7070640 Chung et al. Jul 2006 B2
7070836 Czado Jul 2006 B2
7090712 Gillingham et al. Aug 2006 B2
7090715 Chung et al. Aug 2006 B2
7097694 Jaroszczyk et al. Aug 2006 B1
7105228 Averdung et al. Sep 2006 B2
7108791 Tkacik et al. Sep 2006 B2
7109136 Senecal et al. Sep 2006 B2
7115150 Johnson et al. Oct 2006 B2
7144533 Koslow Dec 2006 B2
7179317 Chung et al. Feb 2007 B2
7229665 Kools Jun 2007 B2
7235122 Bryner et al. Jun 2007 B2
7270692 Gillingham et al. Sep 2007 B2
7270693 Chung et al. Sep 2007 B2
7318853 Chung et al. Jan 2008 B2
7378020 Ieraci et al. May 2008 B2
7419601 Cooper et al. Sep 2008 B2
7459085 Koguma et al. Dec 2008 B2
7470639 Angelini et al. Dec 2008 B2
7555195 Yamashita et al. Jun 2009 B2
7585437 Jirsak et al. Sep 2009 B2
7743929 Kools Jun 2010 B2
7789930 Ensor et al. Sep 2010 B2
7790135 Lennhoff Sep 2010 B2
7875380 Chun et al. Jan 2011 B2
7927885 Nishita Apr 2011 B2
7993523 Chen et al. Aug 2011 B2
8038013 Chen et al. Oct 2011 B2
8222166 Chu et al. Jul 2012 B2
8282712 Chi et al. Oct 2012 B2
8361180 Lim et al. Jan 2013 B2
8366797 Chung et al. Feb 2013 B2
8679217 Chi et al. Mar 2014 B2
8689985 Bates, III et al. Apr 2014 B2
9174152 Dai et al. Nov 2015 B2
9180393 Chen et al. Nov 2015 B2
20020046656 Benson et al. Apr 2002 A1
20020084178 Dubson et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020096246 Sennet et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020100725 Lee et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020124953 Sennett et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020175124 Tkacik et al. Nov 2002 A1
20030010002 Johnson et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030026985 Greiner et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030121844 Koo et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030137083 Ko et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030177909 Koslow Sep 2003 A1
20030213218 Dubson Nov 2003 A1
20030213744 Kools Nov 2003 A1
20040038013 Schaefer et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040038014 Schaefer et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040070118 Czado Apr 2004 A1
20040080083 Czado Apr 2004 A1
20040116025 Gogins et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040159609 Chase Aug 2004 A1
20040206693 Charkoudian et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040206694 Charkoudian Oct 2004 A1
20040207126 Czado Oct 2004 A1
20050026526 Verdegan et al. Feb 2005 A1
20050048274 Rabolt et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050051487 Koslow Mar 2005 A1
20050053782 Sen et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050067732 Kim et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050073075 Chu et al. Apr 2005 A1
20050142973 Bletsos et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050163955 Schaefer et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050210844 Kahlbaugh et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050235619 Heinz et al. Oct 2005 A1
20050247236 Frey et al. Nov 2005 A1
20050272925 Charkoudian et al. Dec 2005 A1
20060057377 Harrison et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060060519 Tkacik et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060068668 Kameoka et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060084340 Bond et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060084341 Bodaghi et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060094320 Chen et al. May 2006 A1
20060096912 Nussbaumer et al. May 2006 A1
20060097431 Hovanec May 2006 A1
20060135020 Weinberg et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060137317 Bryner et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060137318 Lim et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060138710 Bryner et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060138711 Bryner et al. Jun 2006 A1
20060160064 Carbonell Jul 2006 A1
20060213829 Rutledge et al. Sep 2006 A1
20060230731 Kalayci et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060246798 Reneker et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060264139 Czado Nov 2006 A1
20060264140 Andrady et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060286886 Komura et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060290031 Jirsak et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060293169 Srinivasan et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070009736 Chuang et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070018361 Xu Jan 2007 A1
20070021021 Verdegan et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070040305 Armantrout et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070042069 Armantrout Feb 2007 A1
20070062855 Chase et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070074628 Jones et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070075015 Bates et al. Apr 2007 A1
20070084786 Smithies Apr 2007 A1
20070113530 Morozov et al. May 2007 A1
20070125700 Ding et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070134151 Jo et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070151921 Nakano et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070163217 Frey et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070175196 Tepper et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070196401 Naruse et al. Aug 2007 A1
20070240576 von Blucher et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070298072 Kitazono et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080004205 Tkacik et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080010959 Gillingham et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080026041 Tepper Jan 2008 A1
20080034967 Ping Feb 2008 A1
20080060328 Devine Mar 2008 A1
20080070463 Arora et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080073296 Dema et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080099398 Hu et al. May 2008 A1
20080110342 Ensor et al. May 2008 A1
20080110822 Chung et al. May 2008 A1
20080134652 Lim et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080136063 Chuang et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080149561 Chu et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080150197 Chang et al. Jun 2008 A1
20080164214 Lerner et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080207076 Jirsak et al. Aug 2008 A1
20080213574 McKee et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080217239 Chen et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080217241 Smithies et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080217807 Lee et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080220241 Abdelsalam et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080237934 Reneker et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080242171 Huang et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080264258 Mares et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080264259 Leung Oct 2008 A1
20080274312 Schelling et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080284050 Mares et al. Nov 2008 A1
20090026137 Chen et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090199717 Green et al. Aug 2009 A1
20100139224 Lim et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100193428 Hane et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100206803 Ward et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100316988 Sehgal Dec 2010 A1
20110163035 Cheng et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110198282 Chu et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110233152 Wieczorek et al. Sep 2011 A1
20110305872 Li et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120061332 Kas et al. Mar 2012 A1
20130092622 Kas et al. Apr 2013 A1
20140116945 Kas et al. May 2014 A1
20150298070 Koslov et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150360157 Hwang et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160016124 Zheng et al. Jan 2016 A1
20160136558 Zheng et al. May 2016 A1
20160136584 Hwang et al. May 2016 A1
20160166961 Haberkamp et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160175748 Park Jun 2016 A1
20160193555 Park Jul 2016 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (76)
Number Date Country
1471421 Jan 2004 CN
1625429 Jun 2005 CN
101272840 Sep 2008 CN
101318090 Dec 2008 CN
102227247 Oct 2011 CN
102917777 Feb 2013 CN
19545701 May 1997 DE
0257635 Mar 1988 EP
0320033 Jun 1989 EP
0497594 Aug 1992 EP
0781600 Jul 1997 EP
1743975 Jan 2007 EP
1745808 Jan 2007 EP
1829603 Sep 2007 EP
1878482 Jan 2008 EP
1673493 Jul 2009 EP
2174703 Apr 2010 EP
2222385 Sep 2010 EP
2599908 Jun 2013 EP
2-161954 Jun 1990 JP
4-351645 Dec 1992 JP
2000-61277 Feb 2000 JP
2000-325764 Nov 2000 JP
2005-515880 Jun 2005 JP
2005-270965 Oct 2005 JP
2005-536347 Dec 2005 JP
2006-326579 Dec 2006 JP
2007-332342 Dec 2007 JP
2008-162098 Jul 2008 JP
2009-509754 Mar 2009 JP
2009148748 Jul 2009 JP
2010-94962 Apr 2010 JP
2012-520761 Sep 2012 JP
2012-523320 Oct 2012 JP
1020050077304 Aug 2005 KR
10-2006-0079211 Jul 2006 KR
100871440 Dec 2008 KR
10-2010-0037055 Apr 2010 KR
9720622 Jun 1997 WO
0114047 Mar 2001 WO
03016601 Feb 2003 WO
03064013 Aug 2003 WO
03080905 Oct 2003 WO
2004018079 Mar 2004 WO
2005024101 Mar 2005 WO
2006068100 Jun 2006 WO
2006131081 Dec 2006 WO
2007001405 Jan 2007 WO
2007041311 Apr 2007 WO
2007054039 May 2007 WO
2007054040 May 2007 WO
2007054040 Aug 2007 WO
2007111477 Oct 2007 WO
2007137530 Dec 2007 WO
2008034190 Mar 2008 WO
2008073507 Jun 2008 WO
2008106903 Sep 2008 WO
2008109117 Sep 2008 WO
2009010020 Jan 2009 WO
2009017086 Feb 2009 WO
2009032040 Mar 2009 WO
2009064767 May 2009 WO
2009071909 Jun 2009 WO
2010042647 Apr 2010 WO
2010069296 Jun 2010 WO
2010069296 Jun 2010 WO
2010107503 Sep 2010 WO
2010120668 Dec 2010 WO
2011019686 Feb 2011 WO
2011151314 Dec 2011 WO
2012021308 Feb 2012 WO
2012135679 Oct 2012 WO
2012135679 Oct 2012 WO
2013013241 Jan 2013 WO
2014093345 Jun 2014 WO
2014159124 Oct 2014 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (87)
Entry
Roche, Kerry L., et al., Methods Used to Validate Microporous Membranes for the Removal of Mycoplasma, Apr. 1992, BioPharm, pp. 22-23.
Blackwell, James, Mycoplasma—Recent Developments in Detecting and in Preventing Bioreactor Contamination, 2005, IPSE Annual Meeting, slides 1-38.
ASTM E1294-89 Withdrawal Notice, 2008, p. 1.
ASTM F316, 2003, pp. 1-7.
Segers, et al., “Classification of Pseudomonas diminuta Leifson and Hugh 1954 and Pseudomonas vesicularis, Büsing, Döll, and Freytag 1953 in Brevundimonas gen nov. as Brevundimonas diminuta comb. nov. and Brevundimonas vesicularis comb nov., Respectively”, Int'l. J. Sys. Bacteriology, 44:3:499-510, Jul. 1994, 12 pages.
“Standard Test Method for Determining Bacterial Retention of Membrane Filters Utilized for Liquid Filtration”. ASTM F838-05, 2005, 6 pages.
Meltzer, T. H., “In Filtration in the Pharmaceutical Industry”. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1987, p. 103.
Roche et al., “Methods Used to Validate Microporous Membranes for the Removal of Mycoplasma”. BioPharm, vol. 5, No. 3, Apr. 1992, pp. 22-23.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability received for PCT Application No. PCT/US2010/000826 mailed on Sep. 29, 2011, 9 pages.
International Search Report received for PCT Application No. PCT/US2010/000826 mailed on Aug. 16, 2010, 5 pages.
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 2007, vol. 59, pp. 1384-1391, “Formation of fibers by electrospinning”, Rutledge, et al.
Desalination, 2008, vol. 223, pp. 349-360, “Heavy metal-contaminated groundwater treatment by a novel nanofiber membrane”, Sang, et al.
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2008, vol. 153, pp. 860-866, “Filtration by a novel nanofiber membrane and alumina adsorption to remove copper(II) from groundwater”, Sang, et al.
Biomaterials, 2008, vol. 29, pp. 1989-2006, “Electrospinning: Applications in drug delivery and tissue engineering”, Sill, et al.
Polymer, 2005, vol. 46, pp. 2419-2423, “Continuous yarns from electrospun fibers”, Smit, et al.
Polymer, 2005, vol. 46, pp. 6128-6134, “Systematic parameter study for ultra-fine fiber fabrication via electrospinning process”, Tan, et al.
Nanotechnology, 2006, vol. 17, R89-R106, “A review on electrospinning design and nanofibre assemblies”, Teo, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, vol. 392-393, 2012, pp. 167-174, “Electrospun nanofibrous membranes for high flux microfiltration”, Wang, et al.
Polymer, 2004, vol. 45, pp. 2977-2980, “Upward needleless electrospinning of multiple nanofibers”, Yarin, et al.
Polymer, 2006, vol. 47, pp. 2434-2441, “High flux ultrafiltration membranes based on electrospun nanofibrous PAN scaffolds and chitosan coating”, Yoon, et al.
Biosensors and Bioelectronics, 2008, vol. 23, pp. 1208-1215, “Selective molecular adsorption using electrospun nanofiber affinity membranes”, Yoshimatsu, et al.
Chemical Engineering Science, 2007, vol. 62, pp. 4751-4759, “Nanoparticle filtration by electrospun polymer fibers”, Yun, et al.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2005, vol. 97, pp. 466-474, “Preparation and Properties of Electrospun Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) Membranes”, Zhao, et al.
Office Action—Restriction—mailed Jul. 31, 2013 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/194,227.
Office Action mailed Oct. 31, 2013 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/194,227.
Final Rejection mailed Aug. 21, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/194,227.
Office Action mailed Mar. 3, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/194,227.
Office Action mailed Oct. 23, 2013 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,043.
Final Rejection mailed Apr. 30, 2014 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,043.
Office Action mailed Mar. 24, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,043.
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Mar. 19, 2012 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2011/045905.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Feb. 21, 2013 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2011/045905.
Japanese communication, with English translation, mailed Mar. 18, 2014 in co-pending Japanese patent application No. 2013-524096.
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Nov. 28, 2012 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2012/031549.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Oct. 10, 2013 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2012/031549.
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Feb. 26, 2013 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2012/047865.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Jan. 30, 2014 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2012/047865.
Japanese communication, with English translation, mailed Apr. 7, 2015 in co-pending Japanese patent application No. 2014-521858.
International Search Report mailed Mar. 21, 2014 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2013/074132.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Jun. 25, 2015 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2013/074132.
ASTM International, Designation: D 1777-64, Reapproved 1975, “Standard Method for Thickness of Textile Materials”, p. 477-478.
ASTM International, Designation: D1777-96, Reapproved 2011, “Standard Test Method for Thickness of Textile Materials”, 5 pages.
Journal of Membrane Science, vol. 315, 2008, pp. 11-19, “Separation of Micron to Sub-Micron Particles from Water: Electrospun Nylon-6 Nanofibrous Membranes as Pre-Filters,” Aussawasathien, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, 2006, vol. 283, pp. 209-218, “Preparation and characterization of nanofibrous filtering media”, Barhate, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, 2007, vol. 296, pp. 1-8, “Nanofibrous filtering media: Filtration problems and solutions from tiny materials”, Barhate, et al.
BioProcess International, vol. 5, No. 5, May 2007, pp. 44-51, “Quantifying Sterilizing Membrane Retention Performance”, Blanchard.
Advanced Functional Materials, 2008, vol. 18, pp. 2618-2624, DOI: 10.1002/adfm.200701487, “Strong, Tough, Electrospun Polymer-Nanotube Composite Membranes with Extremely Low Density”, Blond, et al.
Desalination, doi: 10.1016/jdesal.2009.06.064, 2009, 7 pages, “Performance Assessment of Electrospun Nanofibers for Filter Applications”, Bjorge, et al.
Database WPI, 2009, Week 200935, Thomson Scientific London, GB, 2009-F08014, XP002726900, 2 pages.
Polymer, 2001, vol. 42, pp. 261-272, “The effect of processing variables on the morphology of electrospun nanofibers and textiles”, Deitzel, et al.
Introduction to Modern Virology, 2007, p. 450, Blackwell Publishing Limited, Appendixes: Survey of Virus Properties, Viruses with ssDNA genomes (class 2), 5 pages, Dimmock, et al.
Journal of Electrostatics, 1995, vol. 35, pp. 151-160, “Electrospinning Process and Applications of Electrospun Fibers”, Doshi, et al.
2008 2nd IEEE International Nanoelectronics Conference (INEC 2008), pp. 33-38, “Preparing Graphitic Nanoribbons from Ultrathin Electrospun Poly(methyl methacrylate) Nanofibers by Electron Beam Irradiation”, Duan, et al.
Filtration & Separation, vol. 44, No. 3, Apr. 2007, pp. 18-21, “Trends in biopharmaceutical filtration and clarification”, Galka, et al.
Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2001, vol. 187-188, pp. 469-481, “Transport properties of porous membranes based on electrospun nanofibers”, Gibson, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, vol. 289, 2007, pp. 210-219, “Electrospun Nanofibrous Polysulfone Membranes as Pre-Filters: Particulate Removal”, Gopal, et al.
Macromolecules, 2002, vol. 35, pp. 2429-2431, “Poly (p-xylylene) Nanotubes by Coating and Removal of Ultrathin Polymer Template Fibers”, Hou, et al.
Nanotechnology, 2006, vol. 17, pp. 1558-1563, “Electrospun polymer nanofibres with small diameters”, Huang, et al.
Journal of the The Electrochemical Society, 2005, vol. 152(2), pp. A295-A300, “Characterization and Properties of P (VdF-HFP)-Based Fibrous Polymer Electrolyte Membrane Prepared by Electrospinning”, Kim, et al.
Conference Report from Nanocon 2010, Oct. 2010, “Water Filtration by Nanotextiles”, 6 pages, Lev, et al.
J. of Supercritical Fluids, 2004, vol. 31, pp. 329-333, “Supercritical CO2-assisted electrospinning”, Levit, et al.
Nano Letters, 2005, vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 913-916, “Collecting Electrospun Nanofibers with Patterned Electrodes”, Li, et al.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2008, vol. 107, p. 909-917, “Preparation of Poly(ether sulfone) Nanofibers by Gas-Jet/Electrospinning”, Lin, et al.
Polymer News, 2005, vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 1-9, “Melt Electrospinning of Polymers: A Review”, Lyons, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, 2005, vol. 265, pp. 115-123, “Electrospun cellulose nanofiber as affinity membrane”, Ma, et al.
Journal of Membrane Science, 2006, vol. 272, pp. 179-187, “Surface modified nonwoven polysulphone (PSU) fiber mesh by electrospinning: A novel affinity membrane”, Ma, et al.
Filtration and Purification in the Biopharmaceutical Industry, 2008, 2nd Edition, Informa Healthcare USA, Inc, Ed. Meltzer, et al., Chapter 20, Ensuring Safety of Biopharmaceuticals: Virus and Prion Safety Considerations, pp. 543-577, by Hazel Aranha.
Polymer Engineering and Science, 2008, vol. 48, pp. 934-940, Effect of Hot-Press on Electrospun Poly(vinylidene fluoride) Membranes, Na, et al.
Journal of Power Sources, 2008, vol. 184, pp. 437-443, “Novel electrospupn poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluoropropylene)—in situ SiO2 composite membrane-based polymer electrolyte for lithium batteries”, Raghavan, et al.
ASTM International, Designation: F316-03 (Reapproved 2011), Standard Test Methods for Pore Size Characteristics of Membrane Filters by Bubble Point and Mean Flow Pore Test, 2011, 7 pages.
ASTM International, Designation: F838-15, Standard Test Method for Determining Bacterial Retention of Membrane Filters Utilized for Liquid Filtration, 2015, 6 pages.
Final rejection mailed Sep. 1, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/194,227.
Final rejection mailed Oct. 14, 2015 in co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 13/436,043.
International Search Report and Written Opinion mailed Sep. 15, 2015 in co-pending PCT application No. PCT/US2015/037055.
Extended European Search Report received for EP patent Application No. 07114167.5, mailed on Nov. 6, 2007, 7 pages.
Extended European Search Report received for EP Patent Application No. 10181774.0, mailed on Nov. 25, 2010, 5 pages.
Bhanushali et al., “Advances in Solvent-Resistant Nanofiltration Membranes: Experimental Observations and Applications”, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 984, Mar. 2003, pp. 159-177.
Ebert et al., “Solvent Resistant Nanofiltration Membranes in Edible Oil Processing”, Membrane Technology, vol. 107, 1999, pp. 5-8.
Granath et al., “Molecular Weight Distribution Analysis by Gel Chromatography on Sephadex”, Journal of Chromatography A, vol. 28, 1967, pp. 69-81.
Guo et al., “Cellulose Membrane used as Stationary Phase of Membrane Affinity Chromatography”, Chinese Chemical Letters, vol. 5, No. 10, 1994, pp. 869-872.
Zeman et al., “Steric Rejection of Polymeric Solutes by Membranes with Uniform Pore Size Distribution”, Separation Science and Technology, vol. 16, No. 3, Apr. 1981, pp. 275-290.
Zwijnenberg et al., “Acetone-Stable Nanofiltration Membranes in Deacidifying Vegetable Oil”, Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society, vol. 76, No. 1, 1999, pp. 83-87.
International Search Report and Written Opinion Received for PCT Application No. PCT/US2016/018146, mailed on Jun. 7, 2016, 11 pages.
ASTM International, Designation: F838-83, “Standard Test Method for Determining Bacterial Retention of Membrane Filters Utilized for Liquid Filtration,” pp. 1-9.
ATCC 19146 Product Data Sheet, “Brevundimonas diminuta,” pp. 1-2.
Blanchard, “Quantifying Sterilizing Membrane Retention Performance,” BioProcess International, 44-51 (May 2007).
Segers et al., “Classification of Pseudomonas diminuta Leifson and Hugh 1954 and Pseudomonas vesicularis Büsing, Döll, and Freytag 1953 in Brevundimonas gen. nov. as Brevundimonas diminuta comb. nov. and Brevundimonas vesicularis comb. nov., Respectively,” Int J Syst Bacteriol, 44(3): 499-510 (Jul. 1994).
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20120091072 A1 Apr 2012 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61210468 Mar 2009 US