Sino Tech Energy Limited (fka CTESY)

[Renee]

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Before the SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Release No. 66906 / May 2, 2012

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-14867
In the Matter of SinoTech Energy Limited

Respondent.
ORDER INSTITUTING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS AND NOTICE OF HEARING PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(j) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2012/34-66906.pdf

I.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors that public administrative proceedings be, and hereby are, instituted pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) against SinoTech Energy Limited (“SinoTech” or “Respondent”).

II.

After an investigation, the Division of Enforcement alleges that:

A. RESPONDENT

1. SinoTech is a Cayman Islands company. It operates an enhanced oil recovery (EOR) services business through a subsidiary, Tianjin New Highland Science and Technology Development Co., Ltd., a British Virgin Islands-incorporated company with its principal place of business in Beijing, China. SinoTech’s registration statement for its initial public offering went effective on November 3, 2010. The company’s American Depository Shares thereafter traded on NASDAQ (ticker: CTE) until August 16, 2011, when NASDAQ halted trading. On October 18, 2011, NASDAQ suspended trading in SinoTech’s shares. SinoTech traded on the Pink Sheets (ticker: CTESY.PK) thereafter until its stock was delisted by NASDAQ on January 6, 2012.

B. DELINQUENT PERIODIC FILINGS

2. On September 22, 2011, SinoTech’s independent auditor resigned. The auditor withdrew its audit report with respect to SinoTech’s September 30, 2010 fiscal year-end financial statements that were included in the company’s annual report on Form 20-F filed with the Commission and stated that the audit report should no longer be relied upon.

3. Exchange Act Section 13(a) and the rules promulgated thereunder require issuers of securities registered pursuant to Exchange Act Section 12 to file with the Commission current and accurate information in periodic reports. Specifically, Rule 13a-1 requires issuers to file annual reports.

4. Because Respondent’s auditor withdrew its audit report for Respondent’s financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2010, SinoTech’s annual report on Form 20-F is not supported by audited financial statements. As a result, SinoTech has no compliant Commission filings, is delinquent in its periodic filings with the Commission, and has failed to comply with Exchange Act Section 13(a) and Rule 13a-1 thereunder.

III.

In view of the allegations made by the Division of Enforcement, the Commission deems it necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors that public administrative proceedings be instituted to determine:

A. Whether the allegations contained in Section II hereof are true and, in connection therewith, to afford the Respondent an opportunity to establish any defenses to such allegations; and

B. Whether it is necessary and appropriate for the protection of investors to suspend for a period not exceeding twelve months, or revoke the registration of, each class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act of SinoTech and any successor under Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 or 12g-3, and any new corporate name of the Respondent.

IV.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a public hearing for the purpose of taking evidence on the questions set forth in Section III hereof shall be convened at a time and place to be fixed, and before an Administrative Law Judge to be designated by further order as provided by Rule 110 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.110].

IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall file an Answer to the allegations contained in this Order within ten (10) days after service of this Order, as provided by Rule 220(b) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.220(b)].

If Respondent fails to file the directed Answer, or fails to appear at a hearing after being duly notified, the Respondent, and any successor under Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 or 12g-3, and any new corporate name of the Respondent, may be deemed in default and the proceedings may be determined against it upon consideration of this Order, the allegations of which may be deemed to be true as provided by Rules 155(a), 220(f), 221(f), and 310 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. §§ 201.155(a), 201.220(f), 201.221(f), and 201.310].

This Order shall be served forthwith upon the Respondent personally or by certified, registered, or Express Mail, or by other means permitted by the Commission Rules of Practice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Administrative Law Judge shall issue an initial decision no later than 120 days from the date of service of this Order, pursuant to Rule 360(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice [17 C.F.R. § 201.360(a)(2)].

In the absence of an appropriate waiver, no officer or employee of the Commission engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecuting functions in this or any factually related proceeding will be permitted to participate or advise in the decision of this matter, except as witness or counsel in proceedings held pursuant to notice. Since this proceeding is not “rule making” within the meaning of Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act, it is not deemed subject to the provisions of Section 553 delaying the effective date of any final Commission action.

By the Commission.
Elizabeth M. Murphy
Secretary