opinion: CONTINENTAL OIL CO. v. UNITED STATES.
  No. 206.
  Decided October 21, 1968.
  David T. Searls, Harry M. Reasoner, and Lloyd F. Thanhouser for appellant.
  Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Zimmerman, and Lawrence W. Somerville for the United States.
  Per Curiam.
  Being convinced on the record before us that Maleo Refineries, Inc., was not a “failing company,” United States v. Third National Bank, 390 U. S. 171, 183 (1968); International Shoe Co. v. FTC, 280 U. S. 291 (1930), and that the record otherwise supports the decree, United States v. Pabst Brewing Co., 384 U. S. 546 (1966), we affirm the judgment of the District Court.
  Mr. Justice Harlan, believing that this case involves issues of fact and law which should not be decided without plenary consideration, would note probable jurisdiction and set the case for argument.
  Mr. Justice Marshall took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
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