opinion: Patricia B. FEHRINGER and Vincent D. Fehringer, Appellants, v. BLUEBEARD’S CASTLE, INC.
  No. 16896.
  United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.
  Argued Feb. 2, 1968.
  Decided May 24, 1968.
  Thomas D. Ireland, Maas, Ireland & Bruno, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V. I., for appellants.
  William W. Bailey, Bailey & Wood, Charlotte Amalie, St. Thomas, V. I., for appellee.
  Before KALODNER, STALEY and SEITZ, Circuit Judges.
  OPINION OF THE COURT
  PER CURIAM.
  This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a judgment of the District Court of the Virgin Islands, sitting without a jury, dismissing the complaint on the merits. The findings of fact state merely that the plaintiff fell on the steps of defendant’s establishment on the evening of April 30, 1965, and “That defendant was not negligent with respect to the aforesaid fall of plaintiff.” The plaintiffs urge that the court failed to follow the clear weight of the evidence, and request us to enter judgment in their favor.
  Unfortunately, we cannot decide the merits of this appeal. The ultimate finding that defendant was not negligent is absolutely unsupported by any subsidiary finding of fact. Indeed, the paucity of findings, in disregard of the requirements of Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that findings of fact and conclusions of law be sufficient to indicate the bases of the trial court’s decision, precludes any intelligent review by this court.
  Accordingly, the judgment of the district court will be vacated and the cause remanded to the district court with directions to make findings of fact and state conclusions of law in accordance with Rule 52(a) and to enter in accordance therewith a proper judgment.
instruction: What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. You will be asked a question pertaining to issues that may appear in civil law issues involving government actors. The issue is: "Did the court rule for the government in an issue related to agency acquisition of information (e.g. physical inspections, searches, subpoenas, records, etc)? Answer the question based on the directionality of the appeals court decision. If the court discussed the issue in its opinion and answered the related question in the affirmative, answer "Yes". If the issue was discussed and the opinion answered the question negatively, answer "No". If the opinion considered the question but gave a mixed answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part, answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion does not discuss the issue, or notes that a particular issue was raised by one of the litigants but the court dismissed the issue as frivolous or trivial or not worthy of discussion for some other reason, answer "Issue not discussed". If the opinion considered the question but gave a "mixed" answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part (or if two issues treated separately by the court both fell within the area covered by one question and the court answered one question affirmatively and one negatively), answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion either did not consider or discuss the issue at all or if the opinion indicates that this issue was not worthy of consideration by the court of appeals even though it was discussed by the lower court or was raised in one of the briefs, answer "Issue not discussed".