Which condition is NOT true for 3rd party establishment inspections according to MDUFMA?

The statement about manufacturers of class III devices being eligible for inspections is not accurate in the context of the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act (MDUFMA). MDUFMA outlines specific conditions under which third-party inspections can be performed for certain establishments that manufacture medical devices.

In general, this act allows the use of third-party auditors for establishments that have demonstrated compliance with regulatory requirements and have a history of satisfactory inspections. However, class III devices, which are generally high-risk and require more regulatory scrutiny, typically undergo more stringent oversight by the FDA directly rather than through third-party establishments.

For inspection eligibility under MDUFMA, third-party inspections are not applied to manufacturers of class III devices, thus making this condition not true. In contrast, other conditions outlined—such as needing to market at least one device in the US, having the establishment's last inspection categorized as No Action Indicated (NAI) or Voluntary Action Indicated (VAI), and the requirement for establishments to notify the FDA of their chosen third-party inspector—reflect the true stipulations for these types of inspections.