The state has filed a motion to strike improper reply.
I don't have the document yet. Here's a summary:
The State is arguing that KZ needed the court's permission in order to file a Reply and since she didn't get that, the filing was improper.
They cite 2 cases, neither of which actually supports their argument. They are simply relying on the fact that the current statute doesn't specifically mention anything about filing Replies to motions. It is also important to note that KZ filed a Reply on the Motion to Stay and Remand on the bone issue. In fact, she also filed 2 supplements to that Reply. The CoA even mentioned those supplements in their Remand order. They didn't say anything about the Reply being improper, though.