Task: songer_appel1_7_2

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 concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". Your task is to determine the gender of this litigant. Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity (e.g., the sex of "Chris" should be coded as "not ascertained").

PER CURIAM:
Joseph Mastrianni was convicted on two counts of selling heroin hydrochloride not in pursuance of a written order form issued in blank by the Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate, such order form being required by 26 U.S.C. section 4705(a). The trial was before Judge Timbers and a jury, and appellant was sentenced to ten years imprisonment on each count, the terms to run concurrently; in addition, Mastrian-ni was fined $5,000.00 on the first count. The only issue presented on this appeal is whether the order form requirements of 26 U.S.C. section 4705(a) compel disclosure of incriminating information in violation of the Fifth Amendment. This question, presented in almost identical terms, has been resolved against appellant’s position in this Circuit. United States v. Minor, 398 F.2d 511 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. granted 395 U.S. 932, 89 S.Ct. 2000, 23 L.Ed.2d 447 (1969). See also United States v. Matos, 409 F.2d 1245 (2d Cir. 1969); United States v. Morales, 406 F.2d 1135 (2d Cir. 1969); United States v. Oliveros, 398 F.2d 349 (2d Cir. 1968). We adhere to the reasoning of the Minor decision.
Affirmed.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". What is the gender of this litigant?Use names to classify the party's sex only if there is little ambiguity.
A. not ascertained
B. male - indication in opinion (e.g., use of masculine pronoun)
C. male - assumed because of name
D. female - indication in opinion of gender
E. female - assumed because of name
Answer:

Answer: B