Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): Plaintiff (“Chevron”) to respond to the merits of the Government’s February 13, 2008 Motion for Reconsideration. On May 19, 2008, Chevron filed an Opposition (“Pl. Recon. Opp’n”). On June 2, 2008, the Government filed a Response (“Gov’t Recon. Resp.”). II. STANDARD OF REVIEW. United States Court of Federal Claims Rule (“RCFC”) 59(a)(1) provides that “reconsideration may be granted ... for any of the reasons established by the rules of common law or equity applicable as between private parties in the courts of the United States.” RCFC 59(a)(1). The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a decision to grant a motion for reconsideration is within the trial court’s discretion. See Yuba Natural Res., Inc. v. United States, 904 F.2d 1577, 1583 (Fed.Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). The party requesting reconsideration, 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the weight accorded to evidence lies largely within the agencys discretion (B) holding that the weight afforded to the evidence lies largely within the agencys discretion (C) holding that the decision whether to grant reconsideration lies largely within the discretion of the trial court (D) holding that the decision as to the weight to be afforded to documentary evidence  lies largely within the discretion of the ij (E) holding that the weight accorded to evidence lies largely within the discretion of the agency
Output (English): holding that the decision as to the weight to be afforded to documentary evidence  lies largely within the discretion of the ij