opinion: PER CURIAM.
  This is an action by a subcontractor, a plasterer, against the general contractor on the construction of an addition to a hospital. The claim is for damages the subcontractor says he suffered because of delays in the work.
  The case was tried by the District Court without a jury. The District Court found there was no unreasonable delay and the work of the subcontractor was substantially completed on schedule. It also found that the subcontractor did not complain of any delay until sometime after the work was substantially completed. When, finally, he did complain of delay in the work of the tile subcontractor, the defendant suggested he submit an itemized statement of the expense to which he had been put by reason of the claimed delay, offering to back charge the tile setter by that amount and to give the plaintiff credit for it. The plaintiff did not submit such a statement, but, some months later, entered into a final settlement of the contract and of all of the rights of the parties under it.
  There is evidence which supports these findings. We accept them, as we must, and the findings lead necessarily to the conclusion that the judgment for the defendant must be affirmed.
  Affirmed.
instruction: 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 "private business (including criminal enterprises)", specifically "construction". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: residential commercial or industrial other unclear