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 respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "federal government (including DC)", specifically "other, not listed, not able to classify". Your task is to determine which specific federal government agency best describes this litigant.

Opinion:
UNITED STATES of America v. Arminio SCALEGGERI et al., Appellants. SAME v. Giovanni MAGLIO et al., Appellants. SAME v. Fortunato DE GREGORI et al., Appellants. SAME v. Ottavio MAURI et al., Appellants. SAME v. Carlo BONATI et al., Appellants. SAME v. Romano TOMICICH et al., Appellants.
Nos. 7813-7817 and 7849.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.
Argued Dec. 19, 1941.
Decided April 14, 1942.
Homer L. Loomis, of New York City, for all appellants.
Paul W. Knox, of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief, for appellants in No. 7849.
William C. Gottshalk, of Camden, N. J., on the brief, for appellants in Nos. 7813-7817.
Thorn Lord, of Trenton, N. J. (Charles M. Phillips, U. S. Atty., of Trenton, N. J., on the brief), for appellee in Nos. 7813-7817.
J. Barton Rettew, Jr., of Philadelphia Pa. (Gerald A. Gleeson, U. S. Atty., of Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee in No. 7849.
Before BIGGS, MARIS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
All of the questions involved in these appeals have been fully discussed and decided by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Marchese v. United States, 5 Cir., 1942, 126 F.2d 671. We find ourselves in entire agreement with the reasoning of the court in that case and with the conclusions there reached. The same conclusions upon substantially similar facts were reached by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Bersio v. United States, 4 Cir., 1941, 124 F.2d 310. The judgments here appealed from are affirmed upon the authority of those cases.

Question: This question concerns the first listed respondent. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "federal government (including DC)", specifically "other, not listed, not able to classify". Which specific federal government agency best describes this litigant?

Choices:
United States - in corporate capacity (i.e., as representative of "the people") - in criminal cases
United States - in corporate capacity - civil cases
special wartime agency
Other unlisted federal agency (includes the President of the US)
Unclear or nature not ascertainable

Answer: 4