|
(b)(4).One sample of (b)(6) lot o2 was received for evaluation.The device received has a broken tip and the general appearance of the device suggests that it has been reprocessed many times.The lot number of the referenced complaint is a7 which is jan 2017 and is separated by 5 years of manufacturing.Both devices were submitted together in from the same event.A dimensional inspection was not required as part of this investigation.A functional inspection was not required as part of this investigation.All complaints are trended across product families on a monthly basis.Therefore, a separate complaint history review is not required.Data was reviewed for notifications pertaining to incoming inspection, stock checks, and product returns.No concerns were noted with reference to km35460.The observed damage is consistent with tray damage and the 5 year separation of the samples supports this conclusion.However this cannot be confirmed.
|