Remove 2001 Remove Compliance Remove Licensing
article thumbnail

Managing Healthcare Compliance in West Virginia

MedTrainer

Effective management of healthcare compliance in West Virginia requires consistent adherence to both federal and state agency standards. To steer clear of legal or financial repercussions as a result of non-compliance, it’s crucial for organizations in West Virginia to establish robust compliance programs.

article thumbnail

SQA Regulatory Surveillance Summary | Monthly Update 2022 – June

SQA

The new guidance from the European Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG) covers “borderline products” not easily categorized either as medical devices falling under MDR requirements or medical products for human use falling under Directive 2001/83/EC (MPD) requirements for CE Marking.

FDA 91
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

SQA Regulatory Surveillance Summary | Monthly Update 2022 – Spring

SQA

Requirements for classification and related issues established under RDC 185/2001, as well as other relevant medical device regulations, will apply for SaMD, as well. China Regulatory Roundup: Latest Guidelines for Medical Device and IVD Compliance, 17 March 2022.

FDA 75
article thumbnail

SQA Regulatory Surveillance Summary | Monthly Update 2022 – September/October

SQA

ANVISA announced major updates to its Resolution of the Collegiate Board of Directors (RDC) 185/2001. China’s Center for Medical Device Evaluation (CMDE) Update Compliance Guidelines and Recommended Paths for Clinical Evaluation Paths for Certain Medical Devices, 25 July 2022. Address gaps in existing compliance requirements.

FDA 40
article thumbnail

How the Fifty States View Electronic Data as a “Product”

Drug & Device Law

2001); Isham v. 2001), relied on these other statutes to hold that a road could not be a “product”). 2001) (applying Illinois law); Serpico v. However, licensed software can be a UCC sale of “goods.” Huntington Ingalls Inc. , 3d 1170, 1173 (9th Cir. 2016) (citations omitted). Accord Stark v. 371, 377 (6th Cir.

article thumbnail

Court Denies Motion to Dismiss Based on Implied Preemption

Drug & Device Law

341 (2001), the U.S. From this, the court concluded the defendants could “comply with both federal and Illinois law by obtaining proof of identity and establishing a donor identification system using photographic identification, a valid driver’s license, or any other non-biometric means.” 2d 808, 812 (E.D. 2013); Heisner v.

FDA 59