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:
ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO. et al. v. UNITED STATES et al.
No. 78.
Argued November 12, 1970
Decided December 8, 1970
James O’Malley, Jr., argued the cause for appellants in No. 78. With him on the briefs were Louis J. Lefko-witz, Attorney General of New York, Walter J. Myskow-ski, Sheila H. Marshall, and Alfred E. Froh. Charles J. McCarthy argued the cause for appellants in No. 106. With him on the briefs were Arthur L. Winn, Jr., J. Raymond Clark, and Richard J. Hardy.
Deputy Solicitor General Springer argued the cause for ' the United States-et al. in both cases. ■ With him on the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney* General McLaren, Howard E. Shapiro, Edward M. Shul-man, William A. Iinhof, Robert W. Ginnane, and Arthur J. Cerra. Hugh B. Cox argued the "cause for appellees Aberdeen & Rockfish Railroad Co. et al. in both cases. With him on the brief were William H. Allen and Michael Boudin.
John F. Donelan and John M. Cleary filed a brief in No. 106 for the National Industrial Traffic League as amicus curiae urging reversal.
Together with No. 106, Alabama Power Co. et al. v. United States et al., on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Per Curiam.
The judgments are affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Mr. Justice Douglas took no part in the consideration or decision of these cases.

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

Choices:
No
Yes

Answer: 1