CathInfo.com

I checked sedevacantist, however, the sedeprivationist is the closest I’ve been able to reason through. 

That's fine, but the fact remains that every sedevacanitst chapel is a non-Catholic sect. And everyone who attends Mass at a sedevacantist sect is, according to Bellarmine, a "manifest heretic".  I'm sorry if that hurts your feelings, but even heretics have a right to hear the truth.

The problem with that is it assumes that sedevacantista are not also recognize and resisters.

Fr. Cekada's sect recognizes Pius XII as a legitimate pope, but resists (i.e., rejects) his liturgical reforms.

Every sedevacantist sect recognizes Benedict XVI as a legitimate pope, yet they reject countless laws that he promulgated in the 1917 code.  For example, every one of their bishops were consecrated without papal mandate, in direct defiance of the 1917 Code, and also in defiance of the law promulgated by Pius XII who attached an ipso facto excomminucation to that crime.  By recognizing Pius XII as pope, they are morally obliged to recognize their own excommunication and act accordingly, yet none of them do. Every sedevacantist priest/bishop hears confession and pretends to grant absolution, in direct definiance of the 1917 Code, which explicitly forbids any priest/bishop from doing so who does not possess ordinary faculties (except in danger of death).

I could go on and on, but the point is that every sedevacantist priest, and every sedevacantist laymen who attends a sede chapel, rejects legitimate laws that were promulgate by popes who legitimacy they accept. The same is true for the sedeprivationists.

So, the categories should be:

1) Non sedevacantist recognize and resist.
2) Sedevacantist recognize and resist.
3) Sedeprivationist recognize and resist.