What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify the disposition of the case, that is, the treatment the Supreme Court accorded the court whose decision it reviewed. The information relevant to this variable may be found near the end of the summary that begins on the title page of each case, or preferably at the very end of the opinion of the Court. For cases in which the Court granted a motion to dismiss, consider "petition denied or appeal dismissed". There is "no disposition" if the Court denied a motion to dismiss.

Opinion:
CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM et al. v. FELZEN et al.
No. 97-1732.
Argued January 11, 1999
Decided January 20, 1999
Michael K. Kellogg argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Mark C. Hansen, Neil M. Gor-such, and Sean A. Lev.
David C. Frederick argued the cause for the United States et al. as amici curiae urging reversal. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Waxman, Deputy Solicitor General Kneedler, Harvey J. Goldschmid, David M. Becker, Paul Gonson, Jacob H. Stillman, and Eric Summergrad.
John G. Kester argued the cause for respondents and filed a brief for respondent Archer Daniels Midland Co. With him on the brief was George A. Borden. Thom W. Moss filed a brief for respondent Directors of Archer Daniels Midland Co. Terry Rose Saunders, Robert M. Roseman, and Henry P. Monaghan filed a brief for respondent Paul Felzen et al.
Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for Barclays Global Investors, N. A., et al. by Andrew N. Vollmer, Andrew B. Weissman, and Joseph A. Grundfest; for the Council of Institutional Investors by Carter G. Phillips, Bradford A. Berenson, and David W. Jones; and for Public Citizen, Inc., et al. by Leslie Brueclcner, Brian Wolfman, and Alan B. Morrison.
Daniel J. Popeo filed a brief for the Washington Legal Foundation as amicus curiae urging affirmance. Leonard N. Sosnov filed a brief for Lawrence A. Hamermesh et al. as amici curiae.
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice O’Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Question: What is the disposition of the case, that is, the treatment the Supreme Court accorded the court whose decision it reviewed?

Choices:
stay, petition, or motion granted
affirmed (includes modified)
reversed
reversed and remanded
vacated and remanded
affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part
affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded
vacated
petition denied or appeal dismissed
certification to or from a lower court
no disposition

Answer: 1