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:
CITIES SERVICE GAS CO. v. STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF KANSAS et al.
No. 85.
Argued January 13-14, 1958.
Decided January 20, 1958.
Joe Rolston argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Conrad C. Mount, O. R. Stites and Mark H. Adams.
Solicitor General Rankin argued the cause for the Federal Power Commission, as amicus curiae, urging reversal. With him on the brief were Assistant Attorney General Doub, Paul A. Sweeney, Robert S. Green, Willard W. Gatchell and Howard E. Wahrenbrock.
Dale M. Stucky and Frank G. Theis argued the cause for appellees. With them on the brief was Clyde Milligan.
A joint brief of amici curiae urging affirmance was filed for the States of Arkansas, by Bruce Bennett, Attorney General; Colorado, by Duke W. Dunbar, Attorney General; Kansas, by John Anderson, Attorney General; Louisiana, by Jack P. F. Gremillion, Attorney General, and Bailey Walsh, Special Assistant Attorney General; Mississippi, by Joe T. Patterson, Attorney General; Nebraska, by C. S. Beck, Attorney General; New Mexico, by Fred M. Standley, Attorney General; North Dakota, by Leslie R. Bur gum, Attorney General; Oklahoma, by Mac Q. Williamson, Attorney General; Texas, by Will Wilson, Attorney General, and James N. Ludlum, First Assistant Attorney General; Utah, by E. R. Callister, Attorney General; and Wyoming, by Thomas 0. Miller, Attorney General. Latham Castle, Attorney General of Illinois, and William C. Wines, Assistant Attorney General, filed a statement adopting the brief filed by the various State Attorneys General as amici curiae.
Per Curiam.
The judgment is reversed. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Wisconsin, 347 U. S. 672; Natural Gas Pipeline Co. v. Panoma Corporation, 349 U. S. 44.

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

Choices:
No
Yes

Answer: 1