Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 1, 2025

Vitolo v. Plus One Holdings

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:25-cv-07204
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
ArbitrationDiscoveryCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gloria Vitolo v. Plus One Holdings, Inc., Judge Woods stayed discovery and Plus One’s response deadline while considering an arbitration motion.

Who this affects

Gloria Vitolo and Plus One Holdings, Inc.; discovery and Plus One Holdings, Inc.’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint are stayed, and the initial pretrial conference is postponed without a new date.

What happened

Gloria Vitolo v. Plus One Holdings, Inc. concerns the schedule for Plus One Holdings, Inc.’s anticipated motion asking the court to require arbitration. The court set October 29, 2025, as the deadline for that motion; Gloria Vitolo’s opposition is due three weeks after service; and any reply is due two weeks after service of the opposition.

The court granted Plus One Holdings, Inc.’s request to stay discovery and its deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. Those matters will remain stayed until the court decides the anticipated arbitration motion. The initial pretrial conference was also adjourned without setting a new date.

Judge Gregory H. Woods issued the order on October 1, 2025. The order did not decide whether arbitration is required.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Vitolo v. Plus One Holdings · No. 1:25-cv-07204
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Oct. 1, 2025

Background

During an October 1, 2025 telephone conference, the court set deadlines for Plus One Holdings, Inc.’s anticipated motion to compel arbitration. The motion is due October 29, 2025. Gloria Vitolo’s opposition is due three weeks after the motion is served, and any reply from Plus One Holdings, Inc. is due two weeks after the opposition is served.

The court reminded the parties that a motion to compel arbitration is treated similarly to a motion for summary judgment. The order did not decide the arbitration issue.

Rulings

The court granted Plus One Holdings, Inc.’s request to stay discovery and the deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. All discovery and that response deadline are stayed pending the court’s decision on the anticipated motion to compel arbitration.

The court also adjourned the initial pretrial conference scheduled for October 14, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. without setting a new date. Judge Gregory H. Woods entered the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.