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 "federal government (including DC)". Your task is to determine which category of federal government agencies and activities best describes this litigant.

Opinion:
NATIONAL WAR LABOR BOARD et al. v. UNITED STATES GYPSUM CO.
No. 8695.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia.
Argued Oct. 5, 1944.
Decided Oct. 23, 1944.
Mr. Arnold Levy, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, with whom Assistant Attorney General Francis M. Shea, Messrs. Edward M. Curran, United States Attorney, of Washington, D. C., and Joseph A. Fanelli, Special Assistant to the Attorney General, and Robert Burstein, Attorney, Department of Justice, of Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellants.
Mr. John E. MacLeish of the Bar of the Supreme Court of Illinois, of Chicago, 111., pro hac vice, by special leave of Court, with whom Mr. Joseph H. Batt, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellee.
Before GRONER, Chief Justice, and MILLER and EDGERTON, Associate Justices.
PER CURIAM.
This is a suit for an injunction or a declaratory judgment against a “directive order” which the National War Labor Board issued in May, 1943. The plaintiff is the United States Gypsum Company. The defendants include the Board, its members, the Director of Economic Stabilization, the Economic Stabilization Board, and its members. The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. The District Court denied this motion and we allowed a special appeal.
This court afterwards decided Employers Group of Motor Freight Carriers v. National War Labor Board, 79 U.S.App.D.C. -, 143 F.2d 145, certiorari denied 65 S.Ct. 72. That case governs this one. The chief difference is that the Gypsum Company’s complaint alleges that the Boárd has reported the fact of noncompliance to the Director of Economic Stabilization and to the President, whereas the complaint of Employers Group alleged in effect that the Board might make such reports. This difference is not material. The Employers Group case decided that the Board’s order was not enforceable and therefore not reviewable; that any reports which the Board might make would be merely advisory ; and that the correctness of administrative advice cannot be reviewed by the courts. Such advice is no more subject to review after it has been given than before,
Reversed.
Appellants say in their brief that no such reports have been made. But the question before us is the sufficiency of the complaint.
The complaint alleges that the Director, and unnamed agencies of the Government, “are about to or have taken” action to withhold priorities, etc., from plaintiff. This is not a statement of fact but a prediction and has no legal effect. Cf. National War Labor Board v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 79 U.S.App.D.C. —, 144 F.2d 528.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "federal government (including DC)". Which category of federal government agencies and activities best describes this litigant?

Choices:
cabinet level department
courts or legislative
agency whose first word is "federal"
other agency, beginning with "A" thru "E"
other agency, beginning with "F" thru "N"
other agency, beginning with "O" thru "R"
other agency, beginning with "S" thru "Z"
Distric of Columbia
other, not listed, not able to classify

Answer: 8