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:
FIRST AMERICAN FINANCIAL CORP., SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO FIRST AMERICAN CORP., et al. v. EDWARDS
No. 10-708.
Argued November 28, 2011
Decided June 28, 2012
Aaron M. Panner argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Michael K. Kellogg, Gregory G. Ra-pawy, Brendan J. Crimmins, Charles A. Newman, and Michael J. Duvall.
Jeffrey A. Lamken argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Cyril V. Smith, David A. Reiser, Edward Kramer, Robert K. Kry, Martin V To taro, Richard S. Gordon, Martin E. Wolf, and James W. Spertus.
Anthony A. Yang argued the cause for the United States as amicus curiae urging affirmance. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Verrilli, Assistant Attorney General West, Deputy Solicitor General Stewart, Michael Jay Singer, Christine N. Kohl, David M. Gossett, and Deepak Gupta.
Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for ACA International by Tomio B. Narita and Jeffrey A Topor; for the American Bankers Association et al. by Thomas M. Hefferon and William F. Sheehan; for the American Land Title Association by Roy T. Englert, Jr., and Ariel N. Lavinbuk; for the Association of Global Automakers, Inc., et al. by Donald M. Falk; for the Consumer Data Industry Association by Anne P. Fortney; for DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar et al. by R. Matthew Cairns, Mary Massaron Ross, and Hilary A. Ballentine; for Experian Information Solutions, Inc., by Meir Feder and Daniel J. McLoon; for Facebook, Inc., et al. by Patrick J. Carome; for the International Association of Defense Counsel by Mary-Christine Sungaila and J. Mitchell Smith; for the National Association of Home Builders et al. by Christopher M. Whitcomb, Thomas J. Ward, and Nick Cammarota; for the National Association of Retail Collection Attorneys by David M. Schultz, Joel D. Bertocchi, and Stephen R. Swofford; for the New England Legal Foundation et al. by Benjamin G. Robbins, Martin J. Newhouse, Robin S. Conrad, and Kathryn Comer-ford Todd; for the Pacific Legal Foundation et al. by Deborah J. La Fetra, John C. Eastman, and Anthony T Caso; for the Real Estate Services Providers Council, Inc., by Jay N. Varón and Michael D. Lejfel; and for the Stewart Information Services Corp. et al. by Peter D. Keisler, Jonathan F. Cohn, Matthew D. Krueger, and Christine R. Milton.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the State of Missouri et al. by Chris Koster, Attorney General of Missouri, and James R. Layton, Solicitor General, and by the Attorneys General for their respective States as follows: John J Burns of Alaska, Kamala D. Harris of California, David M. Louie of Hawaii, Lisa Madigan of Illinois, Tom Miller of Iowa, Jim Hood of Mississippi, Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Gary K. King of New Mexico, Robert M. McKenna of Washington, and Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., of West Virginia; for AARP et al. by Scott L. Nelson and Allison M. Zieve; for the Electronic Privacy Information Center by Marc Rotenberg; for the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law et al. by Janell M. Byrd, Jon M. Greenbaum, Stephen M. Dane, John Payton, Debo P. Adegbile, Elise C. Boddie, and Leslie Proll; for the National Association of Independent Land Title Agents by Gregory W. Happ; for Public Law Professors by Jonathan S. Massey; for the Reporter and Advisers to Restatement (Third)-of Restitution and Unjust Enrichment by Douglas Laycock; and for Erick Carter et al. by John T Murray.
Briefs of amici curiae were filed for the Toyota Economic-Loss Plaintiffs by Steve W. Berman, Marc M. Seltzer, and Frank M. Pitre; for Trust Law and ERISA Law Professors by Melanie B. Leslie; and for Birny Birnbaum et al. by Shelley R. Sadin.
Per Curiam.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
It is so ordered.

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: 8