Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
filed its petition in the justice court against Basil Brown and all occupants, one of whom was Basil’s wife Yvonne. After Basil and Yvonne signed and filed an answer, the justice court signed a judgment of eviction against Basil. In response, Basil and Yvonne signed and filed a notice of appeal from that judgment pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 749, and Yvonne signed and filed a pauper’s affidavit pursuant to rule 749a. After the case was appealed to the county court at law, Apex amended its petition to name Yvonne as one of the defendants, and Yvonne testified at the de novo trial. Both an appeal bond filed pursuant to rule 749 and a pauper’s affidavit filed pursuant to rule 749a operate as an answer. See Hughes v. Habitat Apts., 860 S.W.2d 872, 873 (Tex.1993) (per curiam) ; Montgomery v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, No.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding paupers affidavit sufficed as a pro se answer
B. holding that a defendant proceeding pro se is bound by same rules as party represented by counsel and a court cannot allow pro se litigant lower standard of performance
C. holding a court can restrict future pro se pleadings if it first provides a pro se litigant notice and an opportunity to respond
D. holding that a defendant has a right to proceed pro se at trial
E. holding that although pro se briefs are liberally construed even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to preserve them
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.