opinion: UNITED STATES v. CLAWANS.
  No. 11085.
  United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.
  Submitted Oct. 22, 1953.
  Decided Oct. 28, 1953.
  William E. Sandmeyer, Newark, N. J., for appellant.
  Warren E. Burger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Edward H. Hickey, George Arthur Fruit, Robert A. Sauer, Nathan Siegel, Cecil H. Lichliter, Washington, D. C., for ap-pellee.
  Before MARIS, GOODRICH and KALODNER, Circuit Judges.
  PER CURIAM.
  The defendant appeals from a judgment of the district court of New Jersey granting a final injunction under the Housing and Rent Act of 1947, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 1881 et seq., restraining her from enforcing a judgment in ejectment recovered in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the tenant of an apartment in Newark, New Jersey. The final injunction was granted by the district court on March 11, 1953 and the defendant filed her notice of appeal on May 6, 1953. On July 31, 1953 the Housing and Rent Act ceased to be in effect in the State of New Jersey. The provisions of the act authorizing the final injunction here appealed from, therefore, no longer support it and the whole proceeding is moot.
  Accordingly the judgment of the district court will be vacated and the cause will be remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint as moot.
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