DC Court Refers Confidentiality Deal Spat in CAFC Judge Moore's Suit to Mediator
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Judges Kimberly Moore, Sharon Prost and Richard Taranto's motion for the establishment of a dispute resolution process in Judge Pauline Newman's suit against the three judges' fitness investigation on the 96-year-old judge. The D.C. court said in the text-only order that the parties are to contact Chief Circuit Mediator Robert Frost for further directions on establishing the dispute resolution procedure (The Hon. Pauline Newman v. The Hon. Kimberly A. Moore, D.D.C. # 23-01334).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Moore, Prost and Taranto moved for help from the court to settle a spat on a mediation confidentiality agreement, though the motion was silent on the nature of the dispute (see 2310190059). In Newman's case, the D.C. court referred the matter for mediation before Judge Thomas Griffith, though the process did not yield a productive result (see 2307110045). Before mediation, the parties signed a confidentiality agreement, which "includes nondisclosure provisions similar to those in the local mediation rules," Moore, Prost and Taranto said.
The case stems from the fitness investigation launched in March on Newman's ability to effectively do her job due to her physical and mental well-being. After narrowing the proceeding to Newman's hindrance of the investigation, the three judges recommended barring Newman from receiving new cases for a year. This recommendation was enacted by the court's Judicial Council (see 2309200024).