Not related to the specific content of this thread, but on topic for the
Subject: A certain SCC/NRTL lab had asked last year for a newly signed
agreement. The section on what constitutes confidential information in
the new agreement explicitly excludes the name, title, business address
or
In message b5c2d6968392a3b287d25e55d5993...@mail.gmail.com, dated Mon,
15 Sep 2014, Peter Tarver ptar...@enphaseenergy.com writes:
The section on what constitutes confidential information in the new
agreement explicitly excludes the name, title, business address or
business phone number of
Subject: Re: [PSES] weird stuff in agency agreement form
I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd lay a few quid on this having come
from an EU Notified Body which has a presence in the medical devices market.
It looks very like a reaction to the PIP breast implant scandal.
Think
...@conformance.co.uk]
Sent: 11 September 2014 23:03
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] weird stuff in agency agreement form
I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I’d lay a few quid on this having come
from an EU Notified Body which has a presence in the medical devices market.
It looks
In message 80ca2086-8589-4b72-83fe-a248e5e52...@conformance.co.uk,
dated Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Nick Williams nick.willi...@conformance.co.uk
writes:
I’d agree that this will have been driven by the accreditation body
rather than by the Notified Body themselves. It may also be worth
pointing out
On 9/12/2014 2:07 AM, Michael Derby wrote:
I think you're correct that it comes from the breast implant issue and
from what I can tell, it is all part of the duel-factory idea.
This smacks of push-back by inspecting agencies wanting to get rid of
responsibility for identifying use of conflict
Am looking at the latest 'agency' general agreement form that all CABs make
their clients sign in blood.
A new clause states ... has the right to conduct unannounced audits at the
manufacture's premises as well as the premises of the manufacturers component
supplier and has the right to take
In message
2c6263c88b5c467f83265e27b6a02...@blupr02mb116.namprd02.prod.outlook.com
, dated Thu, 11 Sep 2014, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com
writes:
A new clause states ... has the right to conduct unannounced audits at
the manufacture's premises as well as the premises of the
- just all of
your assembly locations, owned or contract manufactures.
Gmac
-Original Message-
From: John Woodgate [mailto:j...@jmwa.demon.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 12:31 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] weird stuff in agency agreement form
In message
: Gary McInturff [mailto:gary.mcintu...@esterline.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2014 12:51 PM
To: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: Re: [PSES] weird stuff in agency agreement form
I don't think this is all that peculiar in the US right now. When signing the
agreement forms with UL you agree
I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I’d lay a few quid on this having come
from an EU Notified Body which has a presence in the medical devices market. It
looks very like a reaction to the PIP breast implant scandal.
Think of it in the context of the NB trying to be seen to react to the
.
Best regards,
Ron Pickard
Sent from my Android phone
div Original message /divdivFrom: Brian Oconnell
oconne...@tamuracorp.com /divdivDate:09/11/2014 1:48 PM (GMT-07:00)
/divdivTo: EMC-PSTC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG /divdivSubject: Re: [PSES] weird
stuff in agency agreement form
12 matches
Mail list logo
