China Medical Technologies Chapter 15 Proceeding

STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP Curtis C. Mechling Kristopher M. Hansen Jayme T. Goldstein 180 Maiden Lane New York, New York 10038-4982 Telephone: (212) 806-5400 Attorneys for the Foreign Representative UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

) In re: ) Chapter 15 ) CHINA MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ) Case No. 12-_____________ Debtor in a Foreign Proceeding

) ) )

DECLARATION OF KENNETH M. KRYS IN SUPPORT OF CHAPTER 15 PETITION

I, Kenneth M. Krys, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States

of America that the following is true and correct:

1. I submit this declaration (the “Declaration”) in support of the Verified Petition for

Recognition and Chapter 15 Relief (the “Petition”), which is to be filed contemporaneously

herewith, and which seeks entry of an order (i) recognizing the liquidation proceeding (the

“Cayman Proceeding”) that was initiated in the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands (the

“Cayman Court”) in the Cayman Islands as a foreign main proceeding pursuant to sections 1515

and 1517 of title 11 of the United States Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101-1532 (the “Bankruptcy Code”),

and (ii) granting related relief pursuant to section 1520 of the Bankruptcy Code. I make this

Declaration on the basis of documentation in my possession or supplied to me and on facts and

matters that are known to me or of which I have been informed by others. Where I have been

12-13736-reg Doc 4 Filed 08/31/12 Entered 08/31/12 15:31:59 Main Document Pg 1 of 17

-2-

informed by others, the information is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and I state the

source of that information.

2. I am the founder and Chief Executive Officer of KRyS Global, a firm exclusively

engaged in the provision of corporate recovery, insolvency and related services in the Cayman

Islands, the British Virgin Islands, the Bahamas and Bermuda. I am a Chartered Accountant

with more than 25 years of corporate advisory and restructuring experience.

3. Pursuant to the Winding Up Order, entered in the Cayman Court on July 27, 2012

(the “Winding Up Order”), I have been duly appointed as a joint official liquidator of China

Medical Technologies Inc (“CMED”) and, with the other joint liquidator, Cosimo Borrelli

(together, the “Liquidators”), have been made responsible to conduct the liquidation of CMED.

As a joint official liquidator, I have supervisory control over all of the assets and undertakings of

CMED, including its business records. A true and correct certified copy of the Winding Up

Order is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and a true and correct copy of the petition seeking entry of

the Liquidation Order (the “Winding Up Petition”) is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

4. Contemporaneously herewith, I have caused this chapter 15 case to be

commenced through the filing of the Petition.

BACKGROUND FACTS

A. CMED’s Business and Capital Structure

5. CMED is a holding company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands

in 2004. CMED has always maintained its registered office in the Cayman Islands.

6. CMED’s chief asset is its ownership of 100% of the shares of CMED

Technologies Ltd. (“CMED Technologies”), a British Virgin Islands (“BVI”) corporation.

CMED Technologies is itself a holding company for a group of BVI and Hong Kong subsidiaries


-3-

that, prior to February 2012, had 100% ownership of three operating companies (the “CMED

Operating Companies”) in the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC”) that developed,

manufactured and marketed advanced medical technology. A chart showing the organizational

structure and place of incorporation of the CMED group of companies (the “CMED Group”) is

annexed as Exhibit C.

7. As a holding company, CMED did not conduct any business operations of its own

prior to the commencement of the Cayman Proceeding. Following entry of the Winding Up

Order, CMED has engaged in the business of collecting its assets and preparing for an orderly

liquidation under the direction of the Liquidators and under the supervision of the Cayman

Court.

8. CMED’s capital structure consists of two series of unsecured convertible senior

notes and common stock. CMED’s notes and shares were publicly registered in the United

States. In the offering materials for CMED’s issuances of its shares and notes, the Cayman

Islands was identified as the place of CMED’s incorporation.

9. Pursuant to an Indenture (the “4% Indenture”), dated as of August 11, 2008 (as

supplemented by the First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of August 15, 2008), between

CMED, as issuer, and Wilmington Trust Company, as indenture trustee (the “Indenture

Trustee”), CMED issued 4% convertible senior notes due 2013 (the “4% Notes”) in the

aggregate principal amount of $276 million. Pursuant to an Indenture (the “6.25% Indenture”),

dated as of December 6, 2010, between CMED, as issuer, and the Indenture Trustee, CMED

issued 6.25% convertible senior notes due 2016 (the “6.25% Notes” and, together with the 4%

Notes, the “Notes”) in the aggregate principal amount of $150 million.


-4-

10. The Notes are publicly registered in the United States, and, based on the

information received to date, I understand that the overwhelming majority of the holders of the

Notes (both in number and principal amount) are residents of the United States. I further believe

that CMED does not have any creditors other than its noteholders and, consequently, virtually all

of CMED’s creditors are in the United States.

11. CMED’s stock is traded in the United States through the use of American

Depositary Shares (“ADS”).1 ADSs for CMED’s common stock were traded on the NASDAQ

stock exchange until February 28, 2012, at which time NASDAQ suspended the trading of

CMED ADSs. Since the suspension of the trading on NASDAQ, the ADSs have been delisted

and currently only trade in the over-the-counter “pink sheets.”

B. Events Leading to CMED’s Liquidation

12. Based on the Liquidators’ investigation to date, it appears that, beginning in the

latter part of 2011, CMED’s former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Wu Xiaodong

(“Wu”), implemented a plan to divert value from CMED and its creditors by causing CMED to

default on the Notes and stripping CMED of its assets through undisclosed, unauthorized and

fraudulent transfers to his associates and family members.

13. I am advised by investigators, creditors and Mr. Borrelli, all of whom have

spoken with former directors of CMED, that Wu sought and forced the resignation of CMED’s

independent directors and Chief Financial Officer. It appears that CMED’s Board of Directors

last met in November 2011, and that Wu has failed to respond to repeated requests thereafter by

CMED’s former independent directors for information about the company as well as their

requests to convene a meeting of the Board. As of the latter part of 2011, CMED stopped 1 ADS are a mechanism by which foreign issued stock is able to be traded on U.S. exchanges. In the case of CMED, each ADS represents ten shares of CMED ordinary shares.


-5-

making required disclosure filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the

“SEC”). Wu also ceased to provide requested information concerning CMED and its financial

affairs to CMED’s external auditors, PricewaterhouseCoopers Zhong Tian CPAs (“PWC”), and

failed to respond to repeated efforts by PWC to contact CMED. On or about April 23, 2012,

PWC resigned as CMED’s external auditors. In the early part of 2012, in violation of the

express terms of the Notes’ Indentures, CMED also failed to comply with or even respond to

valid requests of holders of Notes to convert their Notes to ADSs.

14. In short, by the early part of 2012, from the standpoint of CMED’s outside

directors, auditors, shareholders and creditors, CMED ceased to be a functioning corporate entity

and had totally “gone dark.”

15. On December 15, 2011, CMED defaulted on the 6.25% Notes by failing to make

a required payment of interest in the amount of $4,687,500. On February 15, 2012, CMED

defaulted on the 4% Notes by failing to make a required payment of interest in the amount of

$4,930,000. Acting at the direction of holders of over 50% of the principal amount of each series

of Notes, the Indenture Trustee thereafter provided CMED with all required notices of CMED’s

defaults on the Notes and has declared the entire outstanding principal amount and accrued and

unpaid interest on the Notes to be immediately due and payable.

16. The Liquidators’ investigation of public records in the PRC further shows that, on

or about February 9, 2012, without any notice to shareholders or creditors, Wu caused the

transfer of 60% of the equity ownership of each of the CMED Operating Companies to two PRC

companies (the “Transferee Companies”) outside the CMED Group.

17. The consideration purportedly received by CMED for the transfer of 60% of the

equity ownership of each of the CMED Operating Companies appears to be grossly inadequate


-6-

and far below the actual value of the ownership interests conveyed to the Transferee Companies.

Indeed, the amounts of agreed consideration were substantially less than CMED had previously

paid to acquire certain of the same assets, and the Transferee Companies were only required to

pay 5% of that inadequate purchase price at the time they acquired their 60% ownership interests

in the CMED Operating Companies.

18. Despite extensive searches by the Liquidators (which included inquiries to

hundreds of banks in the Cayman Islands, United States, Hong Kong and the PRC as described

below), the Liquidators have not yet been able to locate any of the funds purportedly paid by the

Transferee Companies or even to establish that any of those funds ever reached CMED. Our

investigations are continuing.

19. The Liquidators’ investigations further indicate that the Transferee Companies are

partially owned or controlled by associates of Wu and that Wu and members of Wu’s family may

have received a portion of the value fraudulently transferred from CMED and the CMED

Operating Companies.

20. With the loss of control of the CMED Operating Companies, by the transfer of

control from CMED’s 100% owned subsidiaries, the CMED lost its only source of revenue and

was rendered hopelessly insolvent.

C. The Cayman Proceeding

21. On June 15, 2012, the Indenture Trustee, at the direction of the holders of over

50% of the principal amount of each series of the Notes, filed a winding-up petition with the

Cayman Court seeking the liquidation of CMED and the appointment of liquidators to take over

the affairs and property of CMED.


-7-

22. On July 27, 2012, the Cayman Court granted the Indenture Trustee’s petition and

entered an order directing the winding up of CMED and appointing Mr. Borrelli and me as Joint

Official Liquidators to oversee CMED’s liquidation pursuant to the Companies Law (2011

Revision) of the Cayman Islands (the “Cayman Law”). The Winding Up Order expressly

authorizes the Liquidators to, among other things, take possession of the property of CMED,

ascertain and conduct investigations into the affairs of CMED, preserve CMED’s assets, close or

cease to operate CMED’s business, and bring, prosecute and defend any actions, suits or other

proceedings on behalf of CMED.

23. Since entry of the Winding Up Order, the Liquidators have been focused on

gaining control of the assets of the CMED Group and attempting to obtain the books and records

of CMED in order to analyze CMED’s assets and liabilities in an effort to discharge our duties

under the Cayman Law.

24. On July 31 and August 1, 2012, the Liquidators, acting from the Cayman Islands

and pursuant to the Cayman Law and Winding Up Order, removed all existing directors of

CMED’s offshore subsidiaries (in BVI and Hong Kong) and appointed themselves and their

representatives as the directors of these subsidiaries. Subsequent to the change of the directors,

the Liquidators also made demands for the delivery of the books and records of the CMED

Operating Companies and have attempted to make contact with people with relevant information

regarding the CMED Group.

25. As required by Section 98 of the Cayman Law and Order 5 of the Companies

Winding Up Rules 2011 (the “CWR”), the Liquidators have provided notice of their appointment

both in writing to known stakeholders and officers of the Company and advertised the notice of

appointment of the Liquidators in newspapers circulating in the Cayman Islands, United States


-8-

and PRC. We have also undertaken all necessary statutory filings in respect of our appointment,

including with the Registrar of Companies and the Registered Agent of CMED. The Registered

Office of CMED has been changed to the offices of the Liquidators at KRyS Global in the

Cayman Islands. The Liquidators have also notified CMED’s subsidiaries in respect of their

appointment.

26. As required pursuant to CWR Order 8, the Liquidators, acting from the Cayman

Islands, convened a meeting of creditors of CMED which was held by teleconference on August

24, 2012. The primary purpose of the meeting was for the creditors to elect a Liquidation

Committee (the “LC”) as required pursuant to CWR Order 9 and paragraph 5 of the Winding Up

Order. The LC was established at the meeting, and the Liquidators filed a CWR Form 15

“Official Liquidators Certificate (Composition of Liquidation Committee)” with the Cayman

Court on August 29, 2012 in accordance with CWR Order 9 rule 1. A copy of the CWR Form

15 for the LC is annexed as Exhibit D.

27. The members of the LC, as well as other holders of the Notes, have addressed

numerous questions to the Liquidators and their firms regarding the process, the steps to be taken

by the Liquidators to seek a recovery for creditors and the prospects of such a recovery. Based

on the questions received, as well as additional interaction with the LC and other holders of the

Notes, it is my belief that the holders of the Notes view the Cayman Proceeding, and the efforts

of the Liquidators, as the mechanism through which a recovery on the Notes will be achieved.

28. CMED’s headquarters and registered office is now at my office in the Cayman

Islands, and CMED’s statutory records are now maintained there. All official actions and

decisions on behalf of CMED are taken from that Cayman Islands office. Such activities include

liaising and consulting with the LC, reporting to the creditors and the Cayman Court, setting the


-9-

strategy of the liquidation and coordinating with the efforts of Mr. Borrelli as the PRC-based

Liquidator, liaising with the SEC as required, consulting with United States counsel in respect of

what further action, if any, should be taken in existing litigation cases pending in the United

States, attending to the general management and supervision of the liquidation and fulfilling the

statutory duties required of an Official Liquidator as an officer of the Cayman Court.

Management of CMED’s day-to-day affairs is under my control in the Cayman Islands, while

my co-Liquidator, Mr. Borrelli, is closely involved with the investigations and field work

required in Hong Kong and the PRC.

29. CMED’s chief remaining assets, its shares in its single directly owned subsidiary

and 100% indirectly owned subsidiaries, are in the Cayman Islands. To date, despite an

investigation that has included inquiries to over 300 banks in the Cayman Islands, the United

States, Hong Kong and the PRC, the Liquidators have been unable to locate any other CMED

assets anywhere in the world outside the Cayman Islands.

30. The Liquidators have made demands for the turnover of CMED books and

records to all of the banks we have contacted, the registered agents of CMED and its offshore

subsidiaries, and the former auditors and legal advisers of CMED. We have started to receive

requested books and records from certain of these parties.

31. The Liquidators have notified the SEC in respect of their appointment and have

been working with the SEC in relation to the winding up of CMED. In particular, the

Liquidators have been in communication with the SEC concerning the SEC’s announced

intention to institute public administrative proceedings against CMED to determine whether the

SEC should revoke or suspend registration of CMED’s securities. Since their appointment, the

Liquidators have issued public announcements from the Cayman Islands by way of filings on


-10-

SEC Form 6-K and EDGAR to advise CMED shareholders and noteholders of the status of the

liquidation and the possibility of SEC administrative proceedings.

32. The Liquidators have also assisted certain noteholders in connection with their

application to the Cayman Court Order allowing them to convert some of their holdings of the

Notes into ADS in accordance with the terms of the Indentures (the “Conversion Order”). The

Liquidators took a neutral stance on this issue, but provided such assistance as the applicant

noteholders and the Cayman Court required for the application, which included attending and

being represented at the hearings in the Cayman Court and the filing of two affidavits of

evidence. The Cayman Court approved the Conversion Order on August 28, 2012, and the

Liquidators are now working with Citibank (the Depository for the ADS) to facilitate the

issuance of the ADS to the applicant noteholders.

33. The Liquidators are also reviewing existing litigation in the United States which

may affect CMED. A number of noteholders have filed a complaint in California state court

against Wu and others claiming damages arising from breaches of fiduciary duty and fraudulent

transfers. The Liquidators are consulting with the LC as to whether the Liquidators should be a

party to these proceedings. As the Liquidators have substantial powers, which include the

examination of witnesses, we consider that we may assist these proceedings.

34. In addition to the above and despite investigations into the affairs of the Company

being in their infancy, the Liquidators consider there may be other potential causes of action

available to them in seeking redress for the losses caused CMED and its creditors.


-11-

D. The Securities Class Action

35. I am advised by counsel that CMED is subject to several lawsuits filed in the

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which the plaintiffs allege

violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.2 On April 2, 2012, the lawsuits were

consolidated into an action entitled In re CMED Securities Liquidation, 11 Civ. 9297 (KBF) (the

“Securities Class Action”). On June 1, 2012, CMED filed a motion to dismiss the Securities

Class Action. Briefing on the motion to dismiss the Securities Class Action is to be completed

on August 31, and the court has scheduled a status conference in the action for September 14.

PROCEEDINGS UNDER CAYMAN LAW

36. As a qualified liquidator under the laws of the Cayman Islands, I am competent to

testify with respect to corporate liquidation proceedings under the Cayman Law The Cayman

Law is the governing law of corporate insolvency in the Cayman Islands. The relevant portions

of the Cayman Law, as they apply to the winding up of companies, are contained in Part V of the

Cayman Law and the Third Schedule of the Cayman Law and the CWR which are attached

hereto as Exhibits E, and F and G.

37. By the Winding Up Order, the Liquidators were appointed joint official

liquidators of CMED pursuant to Section 92(d) of the Cayman Law and are duly authorized to

act as liquidators of CMED.

38. The Liquidators are expressly authorized in the Winding Up Order to seek

recognition of the Cayman Proceedings. The Winding Up Order provides at paragraph 4(14)

2 These lawsuits are: (i) Burdman v. China Medical Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 11 CIV 9297

(S.D.N.Y. filed December 19, 2011); (ii) Mahaney v. China Medical Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 12 CIV 0882 (S.D.N.Y. filed February 3, 2012); and (iii) Johnson v. China Medical Technologies, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 12 CIV 1009 (S.D.N.Y. filed February 7, 2012).


-12-

that the Liquidators are authorized “to commence all other proceedings inside or outside [the]

Cayman Islands as may be necessary to have their appointment recognised and to recover or

protect the Assets, including monies, of the Company.”

39. It is customary and indeed desirable, for Liquidators in the Cayman Islands to

seek the views of the LC in relation to seeking recognition in another jurisdiction. The

Liquidators have canvassed the views of the LC in relation to the Petition and can advise that the

LC is overwhelmingly in support of this application. Further, as the Winding Up Order provides

the power for the Liquidators to seek recognition and in view of the LC support, Cayman counsel

has advised that further approval of the Cayman Court is not required in connection with the

instant application.

40. Part I of the Third Schedule of the Cayman Law sets out those powers of a

liquidator which may not be exercised without the sanction of the Cayman Court. In this case,

the Winding Up Order provides that the Liquidator can exercise most of these powers (including,

importantly, the power to seek recognition of the Cayman Proceedings in other jurisdictions)

without further Cayman Court approval, with the only exceptions being: (a) the power to pay a

class of creditors in full; (b) the power to dispose of any property of the company to a person or

persons who is or was related to the company; and (c) the power to take any security for the

discharge of any such call, debt, liability or claim and to give a complete discharge in respect of

it.

41. Key insolvency procedures provided for in the Cayman Law include Official

Liquidation, Provisional Liquidation, Voluntary Liquidation and Arrangements and

Reconstructions. Generally, the Cayman Law contains provisions broadly similar to those


-13-

contained in the insolvency laws of England. Fundamentally, the key principle of Cayman

Islands insolvency is the pari passu principle, closely following English law principles.

42. Under the Cayman Law, court-appointed liquidators are officers of the Cayman

Court. See Cayman Law § 108(2) (providing that a liquidator in a Cayman Islands liquidation

proceeding acts as an officer of the Cayman Court). Upon appointment, the Liquidators

obtained, among other things, custody and control of CMED’s assets, and the power to

compromise claims, commence litigation and dispose of property. See Cayman Law § 110.

43. The Cayman Proceeding is not for the benefit of any single creditor; rather it

operates to resolve and determine the rights of all claimants and stakeholders; i.e., the creditor

body as a whole, vis-à-vis each debtor. See Cayman Law § 140 (1) (providing “….that the

property of a Company shall be applied in satisfaction of its liabilities pari passu…..”). Any

person or entity with a provable debt (defined under § 139(1) of the Cayman Law, to include,

subject to limited statutory exceptions, all lawful liabilities of a company) against CMED may

assert such claim in the Cayman Proceeding. Any such claim, subject to appropriate proof, may

be allowed, thereby entitling such claimant to ratable payment of its claim from the assets of

CMED, subject to higher priority claims on the assets of CMED such as liquidation expenses.

44. The Cayman Court exercises close supervision of the Cayman Proceeding and the

Liquidators. The judge currently assigned to these matters is the Honorable Justice Henderson

QC, one of the presiding judges of the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the

Cayman Islands. In practice, this means that not only is the management of CMED being

conducted from within the Cayman Islands by the Liquidators, but that key aspects of that

management is subject to court supervision in the Cayman Islands.


-14-

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 1515(c) OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE

45. I understand that section 1515(c) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that “[a]

petition for recognition shall also be accompanied by a statement identifying all foreign

proceedings with respect to the debtor that are known to the foreign representative.”

46. In compliance with section 1515(c) of the Bankruptcy Code, I hereby declare that

the only foreign proceeding (as such term is defined in section 101(23) of the Bankruptcy Code)

pending with respect to CMED that is known to me is the Cayman Proceeding.

INFORMATION PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 1007(A)(4)

47. I understand that Bankruptcy Rule 1007(a)(4) provides as follows: “[i]n addition

to the documents required under § 1515 of the Code, a foreign representative filing a petition for

recognition under chapter 15 shall file with the petition: (A) a corporate ownership statement

containing the information described in Rule 7007.1; and (B) unless the court orders otherwise, a

list containing the names and addresses of all persons or bodies authorized to administer foreign

proceedings of the debtor, all parties to litigation pending in the United States in which the

debtor is a party at the time of the filing of the petition, and all entities against whom provisional

relief is being sought under § 1519 of the Code.”

48. In compliance with Bankruptcy Rule 1007(a)(4), I hereby provide the following

information:

Corporate Ownership Statement

49. According to CMED’s share register, the following entities directly or indirectly

own 10% or more of CMED’s equity interests: Chengxuan International Ltd (BVI Registered)


-15-

owns 14.3% of CMED, and Citibank, as nominee for certain holders of the ADS, holds 84.8% of

CMED.

Administrators in the Cayman Proceeding

50. My office address is Governors Square, Building 6, Second Floor, 23 Lime Tree

Bay Avenue, PO Box 31237, Grand Cayman, KY1-1205, Cayman Islands. Apart from the

Liquidators appointed pursuant to the Winding Up Order, I am not aware of any other person or

body that is authorized to administer a foreign proceeding for CMED.

Parties to Litigation in the United States

51. CMED is party to one litigation pending in the United States:

In re CMED Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 11 CIV 9297 (S.D.N.Y.):

Party

Address3

Dietrich G. Bachmann c/o Marc I. Gross c/o Jeremy A. Lieberman c/o Marie L. Oliver Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor New York, New York 10017

Micro-Medical International PTE, Ltd. c/o Marc I. Gross c/o Jeremy A. Lieberman c/o Marie L. Oliver Pomerantz Haudek Grossman & Gross LLP 100 Park Avenue, 26th Floor New York, New York 10017

China Medical Technologies, Inc. c/o Stephen D. Hibbard, Esq. Shearman & Sterling LLP Four Embarcadero Center Suite 3800 San Francisco, California 94111-5994

3 The addresses for Wu, Takyung Tsang, Ruyu Du, Yuedong Li, Guoming Qi and Feng Zhu are based on either the most recent SEC report filed by such individuals or the addresses listed in CMED’s Register of Directors or Register of Members, as applicable. The Liquidators continue to search for other addresses for these individuals.


-16-

Xiaodong Wu No. 24 Yong Chang North Road Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area, Beijing 100176, PRC

Takyung Tsang No. 24 Yong Chang North Road Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area, Beijing 100176, PRC - and – Room 1, 1/F, Block 26 Heng Fa Chuen, Chai Wan Hong Kong

Iain Ferguson Bruce c/o Kelly Austin Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP 33/F, Gloucester Tower The Landmark 15 Queen’s Road Central Hong Kong

Cole Capener c/o Stephen D. Hibbard, Esq. Shearman & Sterling LLP Four Embarcadero Center Suite 3800 San Francisco, California 94111-5994

Lawrence A. Crum c/o Stephen D. Hibbard, Esq. Shearman & Sterling LLP Four Embarcadero Center Suite 3800 San Francisco, California 94111-5994

Ruyu Du 113-805 No. 805 Building 113 Shaoyaojubeili Luyage, Chaoyang District 100029 Beijing PRC

Yuedong Li No. 24 Yong Chang North Road Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area, Beijing 100176, PRC


-17-

Guoming Qi No. 24 Yong Chang North Road Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area, Beijing 100176, PRC

Feng Zhu No. 24 Yong Chang North Road Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area, Beijing 100176, PRC

Entities Against Whom Provisional Relief Is Sought under Section 1519

52. CMED is not currently seeking any provisional relief but reserves its right to do

so should the need arise.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of

the United States of America that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge, information and belief.

Dated: August 31, 2012 Cayman Islands /s/ Kenneth M. Krys Kenneth M. Krys


China Medical Technologies Chapter 15 Proceeding

Documents

Transcript of China Medical Technologies Chapter 15 Proceeding