Recorded device evidence

iBOT Personal Mobility Device (iBOT PMD) (K210920): indications, design and recorded evidence

The acquired K210920 file contains product-specific indications and users, design and operating principle, non-clinical evidence actually described, performance evidence actually described sections. Compare these dated manufacturer statements with your own indication and design before commissioning evidence work. They describe this submission; they do not prescribe your testing, validate performance independently or establish a suitable predicate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Computed exact-code research

This decision beside its recorded product-code cohort

The 2021–2025 complete-year cohort contains 2 selected decisions under primary code IMK. 2 have valid reported receipt/decision pairs; 0 pairs are missing or invalid.

No quartiles are displayed: this complete-year cohort has fewer than 20 valid pairs.

The table shows the named decision and up to four latest exact-code research records through 2026-09-27. It can include partial-year records outside the complete-year cohort. The quartiles above use the full stated cohort, not this displayed selection.

Research recordRecorded deviceReceipt → decisionCalendar elapsed daysRecorded submission type
K210920 ↗ · this pageiBOT Personal Mobility Device (iBOT PMD)2021-03-29 → 2021-06-1679Traditional
K243442 ↗iBOT® PMD2024-11-06 → 2025-01-3085Traditional
K172601 ↗Next Generation iBOT2017-08-30 → 2018-03-02184Traditional

Use this comparison: select a record to investigate, read its actual indications and design, and document differences. A shared code or elapsed period cannot establish its relevance to your device.

Calendar elapsed days are not active FDA review time, a promised schedule or a success probability. The selection includes only the stated recorded decisions, not all applications. Latest records can postdate the named historical decision and are contextual research, not its predicates. Shared codes, summaries and observed records do not prove equivalence, current market availability, buyer applicability or predicate suitability.

Calculation, selection and source versions

Reuse the complete-endpoint exact-primary-code, documented SE-decision cohort and its stated cutoff/window. Retain its type-7 quartiles only when at least 20 valid date pairs are present. Independently subtract the named official record’s receipt date from its decision date; missing or negative pairs remain unknown. Show up to four latest exact-code research records, excluding the named ID. Parent analysis hash, source snapshots and calculation versions are retained.

Calculation: fda-named-decision-cohort-context-1; cutoff 2026-09-27; 0 parent records excluded; units record counts; calendar elapsed days.

Source snapshots: 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002.

Read beyond the decision row

Recorded evidence and differences to investigate

The summary is manufacturer-submitted context hosted by FDA. Negative/no-study statements are preserved. Evidence themes are not binding legal requirements.

Short opening excerpts identify the source sections. Read the linked original for the full study context, negative statements, tables and limitations. Public quotations are limited to 120 words per acquired summary; the internal evidence packet retains exact section ranges for review.

Indications and users

K210920 · PDF page 6 ↗ Source 2

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

Compare with your product: Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

Design and operating principle

K210920 · PDF page 5 ↗ Source 3

The proposed device is an update to the previously cleared device Next Generation iBOT                            ® (K172601).

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

Non-clinical evidence actually described

K210920 · PDF page 14 ↗ Source 4

Read this statement in the original PDF; no complete statement fits the short excerpt.

Compare with your product: Treat these as documented evidence themes in this case, including any limitations or negative statements. Ask which protocols, design inputs and acceptance rationale would be justified for your product; these excerpts are not a mandatory test panel.

Performance evidence actually described

K210920 · PDF page 14 ↗ Source 4

The following performance testing was conducted to demonstrate that the proposed
  device complies with the 21 CFR 890.3890, 21 CFR 890.3860, special controls and
  recognized standards.

The excerpt is shortened at a complete statement. Read the complete section in the original PDF before interpreting the evidence.

Compare with your product: The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

Extraction selection and limits

Select observed whole-line section headings or explicit colon-delimited inline labels on readable PDF pages, including the explicitly documented heading-spacing variants in this parser version. Preserve the original heading, character ranges and layout; do not repair excerpt text. Exclude letter boilerplate and uncertain pages. Stop at observed table headings; do not infer table columns or scalar results from layout text. Multi-column or suspicious split-numeric excerpts are excluded until reviewed alternate extraction is available. Original layout records remain retained; any alternate text has its own extractor-version locator and requires original-page review. For each dimension, prefer usable versioned alternate text where available, selecting its longest usable excerpt; otherwise select the longest usable original-layout excerpt. Ties preserve source order. Bounded to 64 PDF pages and 3,500 characters per section. This is a selection, not a complete dossier analysis.

Excluded extraction items: {}.

Historical references beside dated FDA recognition metadata

Read each mention in the linked original summary, including statements that testing was not performed. Recognition metadata does not determine your testing needs, chosen edition or transition eligibility.

Reference in this historical summaryDesignation in the acquired FDA exportRecognition / entry dateRecorded transition-expiration dateSources
IEC 62133:2012
Bench Testing
IEC 62133 Edition 2.0 2012-12
Secondary cells and batteries containing alkaline or other non-acid electrolytes - Safety requirements for portable sealed secondary cells and for batteries made from them for use in portable applications [Including: Corrigendum 1 (2013)]
19-13 · Complete
12/23/2019
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [5]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-1:2014
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-1 Third edition 2014-10-01
Wheelchairs - Part 1: Determination of static stability
16-195 · Complete
04/04/2016
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [6]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-2:2017
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-2 Third edition 2017-10
Wheelchairs - Part 2:Determination of dynamic stability of electrically powered wheelchairs
16-202 · Complete
09/17/2018
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [7]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-3:2012
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-3 Third edition 2012-12-15
Wheelchairs - Part 3: Determination of effectiveness of brakes
16-192 · Complete
08/06/2013
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [8]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-4:2008
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-4 Third edition 2008-10-01
Wheelchairs - Part 4: Energy consumption of electric wheelchairs and scooters for determination of theoretical distance range
16-162 · Complete
01/30/2014
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [9]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-5:2008
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-5 Second edition 2008-06-01
Wheelchairs - Part 5: Determination of overall dimensions mass and manoeuvring space
16-163 · Complete
01/30/2014
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [10]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗
ISO 7176-6:2018
Bench Testing
ISO 7176-6 Third edition 2018-06
Wheelchairs - Part 6: Determination of maximum speed of electrically powered wheelchairs
16-204 · Complete
01/14/2019
Not recorded in this export rowSummary [4] · Metadata [11]
Read scope and recognition limits ↗

Prepare for your provider: the proposed protocol/report edition, its justification for your device and the complete current FDA recognition sheet. In particular, inspect exclusions for partial recognition. An edition difference does not automatically make the historical evidence unusable.

Identifier-matching method and selection limits

Match explicit ISO/IEC identifiers in selected preserved summary excerpts to the acquired, count-reconciled FDA metadata export. Preserve the historical edition mention, current snapshot designations, entry dates, recognition extent and any recorded transition-expiration date as separate facts. No title-similarity, edition-equivalence, test-mandate or transition-eligibility inference. At most twenty matched occurrences and thirty metadata rows per reference; wide matches are held for separate review.

7 of 7 matched reference occurrences shown.

Known facts and deciding inputs

Known context: US. Confirm the organisation’s role, relevant activities and markets against the cited criteria.

Source factRecorded valueWhat to check
510(k) identifierK210920 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Generic device categoryiBOT Personal Mobility Device (iBOT PMD) [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded applicantMobius Mobility [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
FDA product codeIMK [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Decision date2021-06-16 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Recorded decision codeSESE [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Submission typeTraditional [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.
Receipt date2021-03-29 [1]Dated official record fact; not proof of current commercial availability or applicability to another device.

Prepare a differences and evidence worksheet

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

  1. Indications and users — what differs in our product?

    Compare the recorded indication, population, body site and use environment with your proposed label. Record each change instead of assuming the primary code settles intended use.

    Useful evidence: Our proposed indication, user/population and use environment beside this exact recorded indication.

  2. Design and operating principle — what differs in our product?

    Compare physical design, materials, energy, accessories and operating principle with your design. Ask which documented differences change the evidence scope.

    Useful evidence: Design description, materials/components, accessory list and a differences matrix.

  3. Non-clinical evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    Treat these as documented evidence themes in this case, including any limitations or negative statements. Ask which protocols, design inputs and acceptance rationale would be justified for your product; these excerpts are not a mandatory test panel.

    Useful evidence: Existing protocols/results and design-specific evidence gaps, with standard editions and scope reviewed separately.

  4. Performance evidence actually described — what differs in our product?

    The source labels this section as performance data. Determine which described evidence is bench, software, biological or clinical from the actual narrative and original tables; the section label alone does not settle that distinction or prescribe your testing.

    Useful evidence: The cited narrative and full tables, underlying protocols/results and a reviewed comparison with the proposed product.

  5. Which edition and recognition limits would our provider rely on?

    Compare each historical reference below with the dated FDA metadata. Ask the specialist to justify the applicable scope and selected edition, read the complete supplementary sheet for partial-recognition exclusions, and investigate any recorded transition conditions. A difference in editions does not automatically make the earlier study unusable.

    Useful evidence: Proposed protocol/report edition, dated FDA recognition sheet with scope/exclusions, and a documented edition/transition rationale for the actual device.

Work packages and dependencies

What needs to happen first

Questions for providers

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.

FDA openFDA — 510(k) decision records ↗

2026-10-05 · retrieved 2026-10-06

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D01 · snapshot 5a86994ba49a37e71e09be96803fd51981c6c43eaa96caab41aea2b188bfe002

  • [1] device-510k-0001-of-0001.json:results[25179] · record 0d65c723f155377dd11fbe5a5efae7650c65907b50d4f0f1c2389b6a9edf4088
  • [12] Complete results array / fda-decision-context:K210920 · record whole dataset partition

FDA 510(k) summary — K210920 ↗

Fri, 18 Jun 2021 00:00:12 GMT · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot 86fb8e110640140eede35edbab19c1f4360ddda8fd8e2a74cb4088626c893e7c

  • [2] PDF page 6 · record 2c980cccc9c2612d021e67687ee842b5451250073fc34bebbba192ca3527dd18
  • [3] PDF page 5 · record a6595b4778da0697ad27dcb5bf4208aa9c018b356c3003a2237472189ea088f2
  • [4] PDF page 14 · record ab323711f2bdc129df995fd1f610e4d828544a99a4a2c041ebd234abf99bfe53

FDA — recognition metadata exported through the official search form ↗

Version not stated by the source · retrieved 2026-10-07

Audit details: precise locators and snapshot identifiers

Source key D02 · snapshot 94ccf56dc846c7f6d78d6ad77dc6e87d1803ac3612af01d6894949e34c4a78d8

  • [5] CSV row 1013 · record f311b2eeae677be2804411b19a2cf4b76fcb796a93ce7d66236dc4a44e076aa5
  • [6] CSV row 1540 · record c9db01d8ace2487b328c6ebe40f44144ed81d6b6c5df26073b0b58ccf7ffd3d5
  • [7] CSV row 1301 · record 18fa3724dca0267529eb87b86a109d84072449f08f62541ffe811c8f93890e1b
  • [8] CSV row 1750 · record 37eaebd6f5ed339fdcbc47473b702d904d2da8fbbcf91dbc0c4b999cf65790b3
  • [9] CSV row 1693 · record 87b0f1ea762bf1c2b3acdf31f32b191fdd9673fec9d4e5021ce9d55c7e19c587
  • [10] CSV row 1694 · record 457d39a3fa563d62a944520c8909d6a0d6c752daa7427be0f78fe082fbd4b97c
  • [11] CSV row 1217 · record 3f9a28f3afb8c7158e97e6bcb44a2c4b24188d86ca5011bc6ae7742148662e13

Prepare an editable project brief

Confirm the facts, scope and contact preference before sharing your project. Preparing this page sends no provider outreach.

Choose work packages to discuss

Compare FDA 510(k) Submission Services

Usability / Human Factors Testing