What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify whether administrative action occurred in the context of the case prior to the onset of litigation. The activity may involve an administrative official as well as that of an agency. To determine whether administration action occurred in the context of the case, consider the material which appears in the summary of the case preceding the Court's opinion and, if necessary, those portions of the prevailing opinion headed by a I or II. Action by an agency official is considered to be administrative action except when such an official acts to enforce criminal law. If an agency or agency official "denies" a "request" that action be taken, such denials are considered agency action. Exclude: a "challenge" to an unapplied agency rule, regulation, etc.; a request for an injunction or a declaratory judgment against agency action which, though anticipated, has not yet occurred; a mere request for an agency to take action when there is no evidence that the agency did so; agency or official action to enforce criminal law; the hiring and firing of political appointees or the procedures whereby public officials are appointed to office; attorney general preclearance actions pertaining to voting; filing fees or nominating petitions required for access to the ballot; actions of courts martial; land condemnation suits and quiet title actions instituted in a court; and federally funded private nonprofit organizations.

Opinion:
PALMER OIL CORP. et al. v. AMERADA PETROLEUM CORP. et al.
NO. 301.
Continued November 5, 1951.
Coleman Hayes, Mark H. Adams and Charles E. Jones for appellants in No. 301.
Reford Bond, Jr. for appellants in No. 302.
Harry D. Page íor the Amerada Petroleum Corporation; Earl A. Brown, Robert W. Richards and Charles B. Wallace for the ivfagnolia Petroleum Co.; M. D. Kirlifor the Sunray Oil Corporation; and Rayburn L. Foster, Harry Turner and R. M. Williams for the Phillips Petro- - leum Co., appellees.
Per Curiam.
The Court is advised that, on May 26, 1951, the Oklahoma Legislature repealed Okla. Stat., 1941 (Cum. Supp. 1949), Tit. 52, §§ 286.1-286.17, the constitutionality of which is drawn in question by these appeals. The causes are therefore ordered/ continued for such period as will enable appellants with all convenient speed to secure in an appropriate state proceeding a determination as to the effect of this repeal on the matters raised in these appeals.
Cause' continued.

Question: Did administrative action occur in the context of the case?

Choices:
No
Yes

Answer: 0