What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Your task is to identify the issue in the case, that is, the social and/or political context of the litigation in which more purely legal issues are argued. Put somewhat differently, this field identifies the nature of the conflict between the litigants. The focus here is on the subject matter of the controversy rather than its legal basis.
Your task is to determine the specific issue in the case within the broad category of "economic activity and regulation".

Opinion:
Francis D. HOUSTON, Appellant, v. Norman P. MASON, Administrator of the Housing and Home Finance Agency, et al., Appellees.
No. 14453.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued March 6, 1959.
Decided May 8, 1959.
Mr. A. J. Spero, Washington, D. C., for appellant.
Mr. Jack Marshall Stark, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellees.
Before Fahy, Danaher and Burger, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, a Veterans Preference Eligible, was removed from his position as an appraiser in the Honolulu office of the Federal Housing Administration. The charges were specific and completely adequate to apprise the appellant of the nature of the proposed action. He made reply to the agency. In due course he waived a hearing. His separation from employment was affirmed by the Twelfth Civil Service Region and by the Board of Appeals and Review of the United States Civil Service Commission.
In his action in the District Court challenging his removal and demanding reinstatement and other relief, summary judgment was entered for the appellees. It is clear that appellant feels that he was ill advised in waiving a hearing. There is nothing to suggest that he had in anywise been overreached, or that there has been a denial of such procedural benefits as appellant might have been entitled to receive. Cf. Hargett v. Summerfield, 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 243 F.2d 29, certiorari denied, 1957, 353 U.S. 970, 77 S.Ct. 1060, 1 L.Ed.2d 1137; Wagner v. Higley, 1956, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 291, 235 F.2d 518, certiorari denied, 1956, 352 U.S. 936, 77 S.Ct. 230, 1 L.Ed.2d 165.
Affirmed.
. The record is not sufficiently dear to predude a decision on the merits. Thus, we do not here dismiss.

Question: What is the specific issue in the case within the general category of "economic activity and regulation"?

Choices:
taxes, patents, copyright
torts
commercial disputes
bankruptcy, antitrust, securities
misc economic regulation and benefits
property disputes
other

Answer: 2