opinion: The G. & P. AMUSEMENT COMPANY, Appellant, v. REGENT THEATER COMPANY, et al., Appellees.
  No. 12068.
  United States Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit.
  Nov. 16, 1954.
  Samuel T. Gaines, Cleveland, Ohio (Bennett Yanowitz, Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellants.
  Luther Day and Jerome N. Curtis, Cleveland, Ohio (Charles R. Berne, Jordan C. Band, Thomas M. Harman, George H. Rudolph, Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellees.
  Before ALLEN, MARTIN and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
  PER CURIAM.
  The District Court dismissed the amended and supplemental complaint of appellant and entered judgment for appellees in this action for treble damages brought by appellant against the appellee motion picture distributors and exhibitors for alleged violation of sections 1, 2 and 7 of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, 15 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq., and sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§15 and 26.
  We have thoughtfully considered the arguments advanced, the record in the case, the comprehensive and logically reasoned opinion of District Judge Freed, 107 F.Supp. 453, together with his eighty-seven findings of fact, which are supported by substantial evidence and certainly are not clearly erroneous, and his seven conclusions of law, sustained by highest authority. Upon the basis of his opinion, findings and conelusions, we are of opinion that the judgment of the District Court should be affirmed, and that no worthwhile contribution would be made by this court by attempting to re-write in our own words the excellent opinion of the District Judge, who gave most conscientious study to the problems presented and has stated accurate conclusions,
  The judgment of the District Court is 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 "other". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: medical clinics, health organizations, nursing homes, medical doctors, medical labs, or other private health care facilities private attorney or law firm media - including magazines, newspapers, radio & TV stations and networks, cable TV, news organizations school - for profit private educational enterprise (including business and trade schools) housing, car, or durable goods rental or lease entertainment: amusement parks, race tracks, for profit camps, record companies, movie theaters and producers, ski resorts, hotels, restaurants, etc. information processing consulting security and/or maintenance service other service (including accounting) other (including a business pension fund) unclear