Replies to post #174142 on NanoTech Entertainment Inc (NTEK)

[Don]

There is no FCC Grantee Code assigned to Nanotech. Neither has a filing been made for a Product Code for the missing NP-1. Those two codes combine to form the FCC mark for a device.

Since pictures are in vogue here, this will prove that there is no FCC mark... The first component of the mark, Grantee Code, had not been secured by NanoTech...



Further details are available in this post.

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=99181913

[DangFool]

That's the whole point. FCC certification would be a routine matter.

What folks here are suggesting by asking for the certification is that production devices aren't in a final state to send to the FCC. That the devices don't exist at all.

I believe you'd have the FCC cert well in advance of making bulk production orders to Foxconn. However, I personally have no idea whether such certifications have to be made public in a timely manner, nor do I know that failure to find such a certification on the FCC website means it doesn't exist.

As for wireless or non-wireless, all computing devices for the home require Class B certification. Check the labeling on your old answering machine, the one you relegated to the basement when you cut the cord and went cellular. It's a Class B computing device, and the government has made sure that it doesn't spew unwanted RF all over your home.

[shajandr]

Wrong! it is EVERY part of the electronic device that oscillates at more than 9kHz - that is EVERY chip, the PCB board circuit traces, the ports (USB2, USB3, Ethernet, HDMI). It is the entire device that must be tested by an approved tester and a report generated and filed and reviewed and approved by the FCC.

BTW, not only is NTEK (Nanotech) NOT listed in the FCC GRANTEE database, it is not even listed in the APPLICANT database - which means they have not even APPLIED to the FCC yet!