This section of the Manual discusses the standards and procedures for motions for judgment as a matter of law and motions for a new trial, and indicates some of the circumstances in which Commission attorneys should consider moving for judgment as a matter of law. As emphasized in subsection E., the Commission cannot base an appeal on the lack of sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict unless the Commission has made a motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 at the appropriate times and the motion includes the specific grounds relied on. In situations where there are insufficient grounds for requesting judgment as a matter of law, trial attorneys should still consider moving for a new trial under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59. As indicated in subsection D. below, the standard for a new trial is much more lenient than for judgment as a matter of law. Where a Rule 59 motion is made on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence, the court is free to weigh the evidence and can grant a new trial "[i]f, having given full respect to the jury's findings, the judge on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." 11 C. Wright, A. Miller & M. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2806, at 75 (2d ed. 1995).