opinion: BRUNER v. UNITED STATES.
  No. 13411.
  United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
  June 1, 1951.
  Denmark Groover, Jr., Thos. W. Johnson, Macon, Ga., for appellant
  Irvin M. Gottlieb, Atty. Department of Justice, Washington, D. C., John P. Co-wart, U. S. Atty., James H. Fort, Asst. U. S. Atty., Macon, Ga., for appellee.
  Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and SIBLEY and STRUM, Circuit Judges.
  PER CURIAM.
  Brought under the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(d) (2), to recover moneys claimed to be due plaintiff for services rendered under contract with the United States and not paid for, plaintiff’s suit was met by a motion to dismiss on the ground that, under the controlling decision in this circuit, Kennedy v. United States, 146 F.2d 26, plaintiff was an officer of the United States, and the court was without jurisdiction.
  The district judge, on evidence sufficient to support his conclusion, found: that the plaintiff was appointed by the Secretary of War, pursuant to Art. II, Sec. 2, Clause 2, of the Constitution; that he was an officer of the United States; and that the court was without jurisdiction of his claim. So determining, he dismissed the suit on that ground, and this appeal followed.
  We agree that the case is ruled by Kennedy v. United States, supra, and that the judgment should 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 "unclear". Your task is to determine what subcategory of business best describes this litigant.
choices: auto industry chemical industry drug industry food industry oil & gas industry clothing & textile industry electronic industry alcohol and tobacco industry other unclear