Cleared Traditional

K951396 - KODAK X-OMAT 3000 RA PROCESSOR (FDA 510(k) Clearance)

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

K951396 · Eastman Kodak Company · Radiology device
Download Printable Device Report (PDF)
Optimized for regulatory review, auditing and printing
May 1995
Decision
49d
Days
Class 2
Risk

K951396 is an FDA 510(k) clearance for the KODAK X-OMAT 3000 RA 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 May 15, 1995 after a review of 49 days - a notably fast clearance cycle.

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: 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 Eastman Kodak Company devices

Submission Details

510(k) Number K951396 FDA.gov
FDA Decision Cleared Substantially Equivalent - Traditional 510(k) (SESE)
Date Received March 27, 1995
Decision Date May 15, 1995
Days to Decision 49 days
Submission Type Traditional
Review Panel Radiology (RA)
Summary Statement
Third-party Review No - reviewed directly by FDA
Regulatory Context
Review time vs. panel average
58d faster than avg
Panel avg: 107d · This submission: 49d
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.