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:
ROBERTSON v. UNITED STATES ex rel. WATSON
CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
No. 08-6261.
Argued March 31, 2010 —
Decided May 24, 2010
Jaclyn S. Frankfurt argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the briefs were James W. Klein and Lee R. Goebes.
Robert A. Long, Jr., argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore P. Metzler, Jr., and Mark W. Mosier.
Solicitor General Kagan argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae in support of respondent. With her on the brief were Assistant Attorney General Breuer, Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben, and Joseph R. Palmore.
Jonathan D. Hacker, Blair G. Brown, and Cory T. Way filed a brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as amicus curiae urging reversal.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the District of Columbia by Peter J. Nickles, Attorney General of the District of Columbia, Todd S. Kim, Solicitor General, Rosalyn Calbert Groce, Deputy Solicitor General, Janice Sheppard, Assistant Attorney General, and Janese Bechtol; and for the Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project et al. by Joan S. Meier, Deanne E. Maynard, and Brian R. Matsui.
Briefs of amici curiae were filed for the National Crime Victim Law Institute by Douglas E. Beloof; and for Betty Weinberg Ellerin et al. by Evan A Davis and Christina Brandt-Young.
Per Curiam.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
It is so ordered.

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

Choices:
No
Yes

Answer: 0