ORDER

SUSAN C. BUCKLEW, District Judge.

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant AICS Group, LLC's Motion for Reconsideration. (Doc. No. 75). Plaintiffs oppose the motion. (Doc. No. 76).

In the instant motion, Defendant AICS requests that the Court reconsider its order denying its prior motion to modify the scheduling order. (Doc. No. 72, 74). The Court denied that motion because Defendant AICS failed to state an adequate reason for the requested extensions. (Doc. No. 74). However, in the instant motion, Defendant AICS argues that an extension to the deadlines is warranted because it was added to the case on December 22, 2011 and will have only 4 months to conduct discovery as to 8 plaintiffs and 2.5 months to conduct discovery as to the 3 recently added plaintiffs.

Upon consideration, the Court agrees that good cause exists to extend the discovery deadline, as well as the other deadlines, in this case due to the short amount of time available for discovery for AICS. The Court notes that AICS had requested an 8.5 month extension to the discovery deadline based, in part, on its argument that additional discovery will be necessary if the Court grants an upcoming motion for conditional certification. However, since that motion has not yet been filed, there is no basis for assuming that the motion will be granted and that additional discovery will be needed. Instead, the Court finds that a three month extension to the current discovery deadline, as well as the other remaining deadlines, is sufficient.1

The Court notes that Defendant AICS also argues that due process requires that Plaintiffs comply with the original FLSA scheduling order in this case, which required that they provide certain information to the defendants in the case at the time. However, the FLSA scheduling order has been superceded by the Court's Case Management and Scheduling Order, and Defendant AICS has not cited any authority to support its argument that it is still entitled to the information that was required to be exchanged under the FLSA scheduling order. Accordingly, the Court denies the instant motion to the extent that AICS seeks an order requiring that Plaintiffs comply with the FLSA scheduling order.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant AICS Group, LLC's Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 75) is GRANTED to the extent that the Court will extend the remaining deadlines by three months; otherwise, the motion is DENIED. The Court will issue an amended scheduling order.

DONE AND ORDERED.