Jeff's document says she submitted without asking for approval, so the request was to withdraw that unapproved submission. It is reasonable to interpret that as permission to revise and resubmit. She seems to have had her heart set on this particular conference and submission deadline.
That’s not what it says, though. It says her paper was approved, she submitted, and then a reviewer had a complaint. He seems to be deliberately vague here to make it seem as if she was acting without permission, but as I read it she had a vid reason to submit. This lines up with other people in the thread saying submitting hours before the deadline was risky, but common.
It's just weird that I'm pretty sure that the reasons for the request to withdraw was for reasons of the scholarly quality of the work, not for corporate reasons like protecting corporate information, which from what I understand is the job of the reviewers of the conferences and not Google. Especially because other people who work in her department have gone on record saying that withdrawal requests purely due to paper quality never happen and internal review is purely for corporate secrecy reasons.
None of this is adding up to the process issue Dean is claiming.
