Doe v. OneTaste
- Gregory Woods
- 1:23-cv-10184
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jane Doe v. OneTaste, Judge Woods granted the request to indefinitely postpone deadlines because related criminal sentencings were delayed.
Jane Doe, OneTaste, Inc., OneTaste NYC LLC, Nicole Daedone, Rachel Cherwitz, and their counsel are affected because the initial pretrial conference and related filing deadline were postponed indefinitely; the parties must provide a joint status update by the earlier of the related criminal case’s final adjudication or December 5, 2025.
What happened
Jane Doe v. OneTaste, Inc., et al. is a civil case that the court had previously paused under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act while a related criminal case proceeded. The criminal defendants had been convicted, but their sentencings were later postponed indefinitely.
The defendants asked to postpone the October 23, 2025 initial pretrial conference and the October 16, 2025 deadlines for a proposed case-management plan and joint status letter. The plaintiffs did not object. The request was based on the delayed sentencings and upcoming sentencing filings in the related criminal case.
Judge Woods granted the request. He postponed the initial pretrial conference and the filing deadline indefinitely, and directed the parties to submit a joint update about the criminal case by the earlier of its final adjudication or December 5, 2025.
The detailed version
- Doe v. OneTaste · No. 1:23-cv-10184
- Gregory Woods
- Oct. 2, 2025
Background
Defendants OneTaste, Inc., OneTaste NYC LLC, Nicole Daedone, and Rachel Cherwitz asked the court to postpone the initial pretrial conference and related filing deadlines in this civil action. The conference was scheduled for October 23, 2025, and the proposed civil case-management plan and joint status letter were due October 16, 2025. The plaintiffs did not object.
The court had previously stayed the action under Section 1595(b) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, a federal law concerning trafficking-related civil claims, until final adjudication of the related criminal action. Daedone and Cherwitz had been convicted of conspiracy to commit forced labor. Their sentencings, originally scheduled for September 25 and 26, 2025, were later postponed indefinitely. The parties in the criminal action were required to file sentencing memoranda on October 29 and November 5, 2025.
Ruling
Judge Gregory H. Woods granted the parties’ October 2, 2025 request. The initial pretrial conference and the deadline for the joint status letter and proposed case-management plan were each adjourned sine die, meaning without setting a new date. The parties were directed to provide a joint letter updating the court on the status of the related criminal action no later than the earlier of the criminal action’s final adjudication or December 5, 2025. The order addressed scheduling and did not decide the underlying claims.
Effect of the Order
The civil case’s initial conference and related filing deadline do not have new scheduled dates. The parties must provide the required status update by the deadline specified in the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.