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:
UNITED STATES v. SYMONETTE. SAME v. KIRKLAND.
Nos. 6479, 6480.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
April 13, 1932.
W. P. Hughes, U. S. Atty., of Jacksonville, Fla., and B. B. Cisco, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Miami, Fla.
Bart A. Biley, of Miami, Fla., for ap-pellee Symonette.
Before BBYAN, FOSTEB, and SIB-LEY, Circuit Judges.
FOSTEB, Circuit Judge.
These two cases present an identical question, and may be disposed of in one opinion.
Arthur Symonette pleaded guilty in the Miami Division of the Southern District of Florida to violations of the National Prohibition Act and the Customs Laws, and on April 22, 1931, was sentenced to serve six months in the Palm Beach county jail. On July 24, 1931, ho was brought into court, and his sentence was modified to three months and two days, and he was placed on probation for a period of two years.
Foy Kirkland was convicted of violations of the National Prohibition Act in tho same court and division, and on April .16, 1931, was sentenced to serve six months in the Dade county jail. On July 15, 1931, he was brought into court, and his sentence was suspended for a period of one year, and he was paroled to the probation officer.
There is hut one term of court a year in the Southern District of Florida. The term at Miami begins on the fourth Monday in April and ends with the beginning of ihe succeeding term. Section 76, Judicial Code (28 USCA § 149). In 1931 the fourth Monday of April was the 27th. It is apparent that both the above sentences were imposed in the 1930 term and that after the defendants had been committed to jail and begun to serve them they were amended and the prisoners put on probation in the succeeding term. Tho court was without jurisdiction to thus amend the sentences. U. S. v. Murray, 275 U. S. 347, 48 S. Ct. 146, 72 L. Ed. 309; U. S. v. Cook (C. C. A.) 19 F.(2d) 826.
It follows that the judgments amending the sentences and placing the defendants upon probation must be annulled and set aside. Tn both oases the judgments appealed from are reversed and the cases remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

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