What follows is an opinion from the Supreme Court of the United States. Your task is to identify the reason, if any, given by the court for granting the petition for certiorari.

April 24, 1950.
Per Curiam Decisions.
No. 490.
United States v. Cotton Valley Operators Committee et al.
Argued April 18, 1950.
Decided April 24, 1950.
Assistant Attorney General Bergson argued the cause for the United States.
With him on the brief were Solicitor General Perlman, Charles H. Weston, Stanley M. Silverberg and Richard E. Guggenheim. Arthur O’Quin argued the cause for the Ohio Oil Co. et al., appellees.
With him on the brief were Charles D. Egan, David E. Smitherman, John M. Madison, W. Scott Wilkinson, H. F. Aby, Leslie Moses, A. M. Gee, C. F. Currier and Leon O’Quin. Charles L. Black argued the cause for the Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. et al., appellees.
With him on the brief were Donald Campbell, W. W. Heard and Dan Moody. Chas. B. Wallace, Walace Hawkins and Earl A. Brown submitted on brief for the Magnolia Petroleum Co., appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.
Per Curiam:
The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.
Mr. Justice Clark took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Question: What reason, if any, does the court give for granting the petition for certiorari?
A. case did not arise on cert or cert not granted
B. federal court conflict
C. federal court conflict and to resolve important or significant question
D. putative conflict
E. conflict between federal court and state court
F. state court conflict
G. federal court confusion or uncertainty
H. state court confusion or uncertainty
I. federal court and state court confusion or uncertainty
J. to resolve important or significant question
K. to resolve question presented
L. no reason given
M. other reason
Answer: