Cleared Traditional

K901772 - KODAK M35A-M X-OMAT PROCESSOR (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K901772 · Eastman Kodak Company · Radiology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
Jul 1990
Decision
97d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K901772 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the KODAK M35A-M X-OMAT PROCESSOR. Classified as Processor, Radiographic-film, Automatic (product code IXW), Class II - Special Controls.

Submitted by Eastman Kodak Company (Rochester, US). The FDA issued a Cleared decision on July 25, 1990 after a review of 97 days - within the typical 510(k) review window.

This device falls under the Radiology FDA review panel, regulated under 21 CFR 892.1900 - the FDA radiology and imaging software oversight framework. The Traditional 510(k) pathway establishes clearance through substantial equivalence to a legally marketed predicate device, without requiring clinical trial data.

Device pattern: Standard predicate-based submission. Standard predicate reliance. This clearance follows a standard predicate-based equivalence path within the Radiology review framework, consistent with the majority of Class II 510(k) submissions.

View all Eastman Kodak Company devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K901772 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received April 19, 1990
Decision Date July 25, 1990
Days to Decision 97 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Radiology (RA)
Summary -
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
10d faster than avg
Panel avg: 107d · This submission: 97d
Pathway characteristics
Predicate-based equivalence. No clinical trials required.

Device Classification

Product Code IXW Processor, Radiographic-film, Automatic
Device Class Class 2 - Special Controls
CFR Regulation 21 CFR 892.1900
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 Radiology devices follow this clearance model.