April 19, 2019
Authored and Edited by Scott A. Allen; M. Andrew Holtman, Ph.D.
In January 2019, in conjunction with its Version 1.0 of the Working Model for the Software Precertification Program, FDA issued a regulatory framework for conducting a precertification pilot program, which it has currently limited to software as a medical device (SaMD). SaMD is defined as software intended to be used for one or more medical purposes that perform these purposes without being part of a hardware medical device. Specifically, FDA plans to initially implement the precertification pilot program under its current De Novo pathway. FDA’s De Novo pathway is a process for certain new types of low to moderate risk medical devices to obtain marketing authorization as a class I or class II device, rather than remaining automatically designated as a class III device, which would typically require FDA premarket approval.
Participants in the pilot who have a software a as medical device (“SaMD”) product eligible for De Novo classification could also participate in an Excellence Appraisal conducted by FDA, as outlined in the Working Model. An excellence-appraised manufacturer would then submit a De Novo Request containing the required submission content. This “Pre-Cert De Novo Request” would be streamlined and include the relevant submissions of a traditional De Novo that, in addition to the elements documented during the Excellence Appraisal, provide the information to determine that the product is of low to moderate risk and that controls can provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. After review, FDA would classify the device by a written De Novo order.
The De Novo order would establish a classification that enables 510(k) submissions to market a device of the same type, in form of a “Pre-Cert 510(k).” FDA expects that review of a Pre-Cert 510(k) would be more efficient than the review of a traditional 510(k). After the classification through the De Novo order, modifications to a device would be assessed in accordance with the relevant FDA’s guidance on submitting a 510(k) for a software change to an existing device to decide whether the modification could significantly affect safety and effectiveness or is a change to the intended use of the software.
Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
10th Annual Georgia Asian Pacific American Bar Association Gala
May 29, 2024
Atlanta
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.