PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 15, 2016
Disclosure; and Encouragement of Verification, Innovation, Cleaning, and Efficiency Act of 2016
This bill amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by requiring a manufacturer of a medical device to give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) premarket notification of changes to the design or reprocessing instructions of its device.
Medical device manufacturers must also notify the FDA within five days of widely disseminating to health care providers in a foreign country communications relating to a change to the recommended reprocessing protocols, if any, for their device, or a safety concern about the device.
The bill bans the devices if the manufacturers violate the notification requirements concerning those design or reprocessing changes or communications to foreign health care providers.
The FDA must publish a list of the types of rapid assessment tests of reusable devices for which premarket notification must include proposed labeling, including validated instructions regarding sanitizing reusable devices.
People & committees
Rep. Lieu, Ted [D-CA-33] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4965 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4965 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4965 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4965 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.