← 483 OBSERVATION EXPLORER

FDA 483 OBSERVATION · #909 OF 1,000 MOST-CITED

Incorrect translation to production specifications

FDA cited this observation 16 times across 16 firms in recent inspections. Below: how it breaks down by program area and fiscal year, and real examples of how FDA worded it on Form FDA 483.

BY PROGRAM AREA
Devices16
BY FISCAL YEAR
FY20261
FY20251
FY20241
FY20233
FY20222
FY20211
FY20191
FY20185
FY20171

How FDA worded it — real examples

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

BioMed Laboratories, LLC. · Dallas, Texas · Devices · 2025-12-19

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

Global Plastics Inc. · Indianapolis, Indiana · Devices · 2025-02-28

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

RESTECH · Houston, Texas · Devices · 2024-09-18

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

Footprint Medical, Inc. · San Antonio, Texas · Devices · 2023-06-14

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

Lone Star Medical Products, Inc. · Stafford, Texas · Devices · 2023-04-27

The device design was not correctly translated into production specifications.

Sharps Compliance, Inc. · Houston, Texas · Devices · 2023-01-31

Related SPEQ references

Where to read the requirements behind this observation area on SPEQ. These are SPEQ's topic and audience pages — not an FDA classification of the citation.

Medical devices

Examples are a representative sample of FDA's published inspection observations. SPEQ is not affiliated with the FDA; this is a reference view of public FDA data.

Weekly Briefing

Get the Weekly GxP Briefing

Curated regulatory intelligence — enforcement, recalls, guidance, and quality signals — in one practitioner-grade email each week. Free.

Read a past issue →