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").

Opinion:
Guadalupe VILLARREAL, Jr., by and through his father and next friend Guadalupe Villarreal, Sr., Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 17041.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
April 28, 1958.
Alonso S. Perales, Ronald Smallwood, San Antonio, Tex., for appellant.
John R. Locke, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Russell B. Wine, U. S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., for appellee.
Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and TUTTLE and BROWN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, entered after a full trial on the facts, denying recovery in an action brought against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1346(b), 2671 et seq.
Filed on behalf of a nine year old boy by his father, the suit was for injuries sustained from the explosion of a dud shell which the injured boy had picked up in his own yard where it had been deposited by plaintiff’s older brother who in turn had found it on private property located behind plaintiff’s residence.
The district judge, on evidence fully supporting them, made findings completely negativing plaintiff’s claims of negligence and gave judgment for defendant.
The judgment was right. It is affirmed. Denny v. United States, 10 Cir., 185 F.2d 108; Ford v. United States, 10 Cir., 200 F.2d 272; United States v. In-mon, 5 Cir., 205 F.2d 681; Porter v. United States, D.C., 128 F.Supp. 590, affirmed, 4 Cir., 228 F.2d 389.

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.

Choices:
not ascertained
male - indication in opinion (e.g., use of masculine pronoun)
male - assumed because of name
female - indication in opinion of gender
female - assumed because of name

Answer: 1