ORDER

SUSAN O. HICKEY, Chief District Judge.

Before the Court is Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Entry of Scheduling Order for Jurisdictional Discovery and Briefing on Defendant's Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 10). The Court finds that no response is necessary and that the matter is ripe for consideration.

On February 7, 2019, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue. On February 12, 2019, Plaintiffs requested an extension of time to respond to the motion to dismiss and the Court granted the extension on February 13, 2019. On March 14, 2019, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion, stating that they require discovery on the issues raised in Defendant's motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs state that the parties have agreed to conduct limited discovery on personal jurisdiction as to Defendant. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request that the Court set certain deadlines as to when the parties' limited jurisdictional discovery should be completed and when the remaining briefing of Defendant's motion to dismiss should be filed.

Upon consideration, the Court finds that good cause for the motion has been shown. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motion (ECF No. 10) is hereby GRANTED. The parties must complete their limited discovery as to personal jurisdiction over Defendant on or before May 1, 2019. Plaintiffs must respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss on or before May 14, 2019. Defendant shall file a reply, if any, on or before May 21, 2019. If Defendant files a reply, Plaintiff may file a sur-reply on or before May 28, 2019.

IT IS SO ORDERED.