MD AG Gansler has filed his reply brief: http://www.archive.org/download/gov....80772.70.0.pdf
First, the plaintiffs misread footnote #1, the State was just saying that the Judge had more options than an either/or option, as regards the stay.
Then, the State would be hugely inconvenienced if it had to track the permits and the 4th overturned the decision. (psst! MD has had this permitting system for 40 years, and they still can't track the permittees???)
They cite (once again) their own stats to prove that Gura's stats are false. (Gura provided the raw data which MD still doesn't do)
They cite the Moore
decision as being correct and Judge Legg's decision as being an "outlier." (this is an attempt to "show" they will win at appeal)
Overall, there is a whole lot of ipse dixit
(Assertion of fact without proof - a logical fallacy) going on in these 10 pages.
Now we wait to see if the State has presented enough of a case for Judge Legg to continue the stay.