What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to determine the treatment the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed accorded the decision of the court it reviewed, that is, whether the court below the Supreme Court (typically a federal court of appeals or a state supreme court) affirmed, reversed, remanded, denied or dismissed the decision of the court it reviewed (typically a trial court). Adhere to the language used in the "holding" in the summary of the case on the title page or prior to Part I of the Court's opinion. Exceptions to the literal language are the following: where the Court overrules the lower court, treat this a petition or motion granted; where the court whose decision the Supreme Court is reviewing refuses to enforce or enjoins the decision of the court, tribunal, or agency which it reviewed, treat this as reversed; where the court whose decision the Supreme Court is reviewing enforces the decision of the court, tribunal, or agency which it reviewed, treat this as affirmed; where the court whose decision the Supreme Court is reviewing sets aside the decision of the court, tribunal, or agency which it reviewed, treat this as vacated; if the decision is set aside and remanded, treat it as vacated and remanded.

Opinion:
VASQUEZ v. UNITED STATES
No. 11-199.
Argued March 21, 2012
Decided April 2, 2012
Beau B. Brindley argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Joshua J. Jones and Blair T. Westover.
Anthony A. Yang argued the cause for the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Verrilli, Assistant Attorney General Breuer, Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben, and Joel M. Gershowitz.
Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers by John D. Cline and Jeffrey T. Green; and for Jeffrey K. Skilling by Daniel M. Petrocelli, M. Randall Oppenheimer, Matthew T. Kline, David J. Marroso, Jonathan D. Hacker, and Anton Metlitsky.
A brief of amici curiae urging affirmance was filed for the State of Texas et al. by Greg Abbott, Attorney General of Texas, Jonathan F. Mitchell, Solicitor General, Daniel T. Hodge, First Assistant Attorney General, and Don Clemmer, Deputy Attorney General, and by the Attorneys General for their respective States as follows: Luther Strange of Alabama, Tom Horne of Arizona, John W. Suthers of Colorado, Joseph R. Biden III of Delaware, Pamela Jo Bondi of Florida, David M. Louie of Hawaii, Lisa Madigan of Illinois, Gregory F. Zoeller of Indiana, Jack Conway of Kentucky, James D. “Buddy” Caldwell of Louisiana, William J. Schneider of Maine, Bill Schuette of Michigan, Jon Bruning of Nebraska, Alan Wilson of South Carolina, J. B. Van Hollen of Wisconsin, and Gregory A. Phillips of Wyoming.
Per Curiam.
The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
It is so ordered.

Question: What treatment did the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed accorded the decision of the court it reviewed?

Choices:
stay, petition, or motion granted
affirmed
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
modify
remand
unusual disposition

Answer: 1