DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION, et al., Petitioners
v.
MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS, et al.
No. 13-1496.
Supreme Court of the United States
June 23, 2016.
Neal Kumar Katyal, Colleen E.R. Sinzdak, Eugene A. Sokoloff, Frederick Liu, Hogan Lovells US LLP, Washington, DC, Melissa T. Carleton, Acting Attorney General, N. Cheryl Hamby, Choctaw, MS, C. Bryant Rogers, Carolyn J. Abeita, VanAmberg, Rogers, Yepa, Abeita, Gomez & Works, LLP, Santa Fe, NM, Riyaz A. Kanji, Philip H. Tinker, Kanji & Katzen, PLLC, Detroit, MI, Terry L. Jordan, Attorney At Law, Philadelphia, MS, Brian D. Dover, Attorney PLLC, Jonesboro, AR, for Respondents.
Edward F. Harold, Fisher & Phillips LLP, New Orleans, LA, Thomas C. Goldstein, Goldstein & Russell, P.C., Bethesda, MD, for Petitioners.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
case did not arise on cert or cert not granted federal court conflict federal court conflict and to resolve important or significant question putative conflict conflict between federal court and state court state court conflict federal court confusion or uncertainty state court confusion or uncertainty federal court and state court confusion or uncertainty to resolve important or significant question to resolve question presented no reason given other reason