Updated fields: g4, d10, h2, h3, h6, h10.Device identifier : (b)(4).The perforator was returned for evaluation: device history record a dhr review could not be performed since the lot number of the product was unknown.Failure analysis the perforator unit was inspected using the unaided eye: it was observed that the perforator was received disassembled with no spring.The outer drill had heavy damage unrelated to manufacturing, there was organic matter present as well as a worn eto label.Ifu testing procedure was performed with no observed anomalies.The testing could not be performed in as-is condition, and therefore the unit had to be reassembled in order to test the unit.Functional testing was performed using the same protocol it underwent at finished goods testing prior to release.The unit was found to perform as intended and fulfilled the acceptance criteria.The root cause is undetermined and was unable to be confirmed in the complaint evaluation.Product was received for analysis and the investigation could not confirm the complaint.
|