Task: songer_genapel1

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 
Your task is to determine the nature of the first listed appellant.

PER CURIAM.
Walter Clemons was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) by robbing a federally insured savings and loan association, and in the course of the robbery assaulting a teller and putting her life in jeopardy by use of a dangerous weapon. He was sentenced to twenty-three years imprisonment, and now appeals.
His only contention on appeal is that the government did not introduce evidence sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the savings institution involved, the Blue Valley Federal Savings and Loan Association, was federally insured.
The government produced the association’s certificate of insurance issued by the Federal Home Loan Bank. The certificate was identified by a vice president of the association. The government also introduced a premium notice and cancelled check issued in payment thereof for 1975, the year of the robbery. In addition, the parties stipulated that this premium had in fact been paid. This evidence was plainly sufficient to support a finding that the association was federally insured at the time of the robbery. United States v. Merrill, 484 F.2d 168, 169-70 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 1077, 94 S.Ct. 594, 38 L.Ed.2d 484 (1973); Scruggs v. United States, 450 F.2d 359, 361 (8th Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 405 U.S. 1071, 92 S.Ct. 1521, 31 L.Ed.2d 804 (1972). Appellant’s contention is thus without merit.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Question: What is the nature of the first listed appellant?
A. private business (including criminal enterprises)
B. private organization or association
C. federal government (including DC)
D. sub-state government (e.g., county, local, special district)
E. state government (includes territories & commonwealths)
F. government - level not ascertained
G. natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)
H. miscellaneous
I. not ascertained
Answer:

Answer: G