I think you are correct. Having some elements of a company outside of bankruptcy does not preclude a share cancellation. What it does is limit the involvement of the bankruptcy court to where the court is needed to provide protection and can have an impact, while leaving healthy operations and those beyond the reach of the court to function without encumbrance.
I believe that the reason that only certain parts of the company are in bankruptcy has to do with which operating units are actually party to the debts that were due, and perhaps some limits to the jurisdictional "reach" of a US bankruptcy court.
Let's say for example there are 3 subsidiaries--A, B and C. A has a debt coming due and a liquidity problem. B is OK, and C is foreign. The bankruptcy would cover subsidiary A and the parent company. The bankruptcy court has to approve significant operational decisions for A, and will intervene to assure that assets are not transferred out of A to other units. B would not be included as there is no reason for the bankruptcy court to oversee its operations, and no reason to constrain those operations or make them more cumbersome. C would not be included as there is nothing a US court could do about it anyway.
In reality, you could have several units with problems (A1, A2, A3...), several more domestic units that are fine (B1, B2, B3...) and multiple foreign subs (C1, C2, C3...).
The publicly traded shares deal with the parent company only, providing an interest in the subs only indirectly through the cash flows they generate for the parent (operationally or via asset sales). Shareholders do NOT have a separate direct interest in each sub, and therefore do not have any direct "share" in units outside of bankruptcy.
If original shares were to be canceled (which, like you, I think unlikely for CEMJQ), followed by issuance of "new" shares, the the owners of the new shares would own the entire company.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
