Cleared Traditional

ANTI NDNA IMMUNOFLOURESCENT TEST SYS (K810981) - FDA 510(k) Clearance

Class II Immunology device cleared through predicate-based substantial equivalence - typically does not require clinical trials.

K810981 · Immuno-Products Industries · Immunology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Apr 1981
Decision
16d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K810981 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the ANTI NDNA IMMUNOFLOURESCENT TEST SYS. Classified as System, Test, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (product code DHC), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Immuno-Products Industries (Mchenry, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on April 29, 1981 after a review of 16 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

This device falls under the Immunology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 866.5820 - the FDA immunology device framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Fast-track predicate clearance. Standard predicate reliance. The short review cycle indicates strong predicate alignment - the FDA found sufficient equivalence without extended technical review.

View all Immuno-Products Industries devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K810981 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 13, 1981
Decision Date April 29, 1981
Days to Decision 16 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Immunology (IM)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
88d faster than avg
Panel avg: 104d · This submission: 16d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code DHC System, Test, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 866.5820
What this classification means

Class II devices require demonstration of substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device. This pathway does not require clinical trials - it relies on engineering equivalence and performance data. Most Immunology devices follow this clearance model.