text:
Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Arizona District Court Clabaugh v. Yuma, County of Filing 45
Clabaugh v. Yuma, County of
ORDER denying 31 Plaintif's Motion for Summary Judgment and granting 34 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. The clerk shall enter judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint with prejudice. Signed by Judge H Russel Holland on 11/20/14.(LSP)
WO IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA DOUGLAS CLABAUGH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) COUNTY OF YUMA, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) No. 2:13-cv-1061-HRH ORDER Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment Plaintiff moves for summary judgment.1 This motion is opposed,2 and defendant cross-moves for summary judgment.3 Defendant's cross-motion is opposed.4 argument was requested and has been heard. Facts Plaintiff is Douglas Clabaugh. Defendant is Yuma County. 1 Docket No. 31. 2 Docket No. 39. 3 Docket No. 34. 4 Docket No. 35. -1- Oral Plaintiff was employed as a deputy by the Yuma County Sheriff's Office.5 On October 10, 2012, plaintiff had a brief conversation with Jack Lehr, who was also employed by defendant, when plaintiff dropped his patrol vehicle off at the County Maintenance Yard for service. The conversation concerned the upcoming election for sheriff and a debate between the candidates that had been held the night before. During the conversation, plaintiff made reference to the "good old boy system" in the Sheriff's Office. Lehr reported the conversation to his supervisor, Matthew Catron, via email, because he "kind of felt offended" by plaintiff's remark about "the good old boy system."6 Lehr testified that he did not really know what plaintiff was referring to in using that term but that he thought it was inappropriate for plaintiff to use that term.7 In his email to Catron, Lehr stated that plaintiff asked if I attended the debate between Wilmot and Sandoval for Sheriff. I told him no I did not attend it and that I did not know about [the debate] until yesterday afternoon. Deputy Clabaugh said he would of liked to have attend[ed] the debate but had to work at night. I told Deputy Clabaugh that it is on the front of the paper that is lying on the other desk. He then said that he is 5 Plaintiff was employed as a deputy from 2002-2004, was then recalled to active duty in the Marine Corp, and then rejoined the Sheriff's Office as a deputy in late 2007. 6 Deposition of Jack Lehr at 12:16-18, Exhibit 3, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 7 Id. at 15:14-20. Lehr testified that he did not think it was inappropriate that plaintiff brought up the debate. Id. at 15:21-25. -2- voting for Sandoval, cause he is tired of the gold ole boy things that go on at the Department. He also said that he is not the only one that will be voting for Sandoval from here and he meets with Sandoval regularly. He then mentioned the Youtube video with Sandoval in it and said that is not a deal thing. [sic] I then told Deputy Clabaugh that I am a registered Democrat and will always vote[] for the right person and that person is not Sandoval. I told him that I have been at this Department for a long time and this Department is running smoothly and after I saw the Sandoval video, I believe him to be corrupt. After that Deputy Clabaugh's ride showed up and he said he would be in for uniforms soon and he left the Warehouse.[8] Plaintiff testified that, contrary to what Lehr wrote, he did not use the term "good old boy system" as a means of expressing his own personal opinion about the Sheriff's Department, but rather he used the term to indicate why others were going to vote for Sandoval.9 On October 10, 2012, Lieutenant Darren Simmons spoke to plaintiff about his conversation with Lehr. Plaintiff contends that he "advised [Simmons] I would no longer have any conversations with Mr. Lehr" and that he "asked the Lieutenant if this would be the end of the matter" and was told that it would be.10 8 Exhibit 5, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 9 Deposition of Douglas Clabaugh at 35:13-20, Exhibit 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 10 Exhibit 11 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. -3- Catron had, however, forwarded Lehr's email to Captain Eben Bratcher.11 Bratcher's response was "I'd like a list of what 'good ol boy' actions he [plaintiff] is disturbed by."12 On October 11, 2012, plaintiff received a phone call from Simmons who "advised that Captain Bratcher wanted a memorandum about the incident between me and Mr. Lehr. Lieutenant Simmons also said I needed to put in the memo ... what a good ol boy system is and what I meant by it and how to correct it."13 Plaintiff wrote a memo dated October 14, 2012 in response. Plaintiff wrote: On 10/11/12, I was advised by Lt Simmons to complete a memo in reference to a conversation that occurred on 10/10/12, between Mr. Jack Lehr and me. The conversation was in reference to the upcoming election. Mr. Lehr had stated his opinion about the changes that could take effect. I then brought up my opinion about the changes that could take place and what I have heard from other persons. After speaking with Lt. Simmons about the situation on 10/10/12, I was advised not to express my opinion to anyone while on duty. I advised Lt. Simmons that I understood and there would be no further situations of this matter. As far as the conversation was concerned, I thought it was two adults that had a difference of opinion[] and nothing 11 Exhibit 5 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 12 Exhibit 11 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 13 Id. -4- more. I was not angry or upset in reference to Mr. Lehr's opinion and was glad he shared it.[14] Plaintiff submitted the October 14 memo to Simmons on October 15, 2012, who forwarded it to Bratcher. Bratcher determined that the memo was not sufficient and asked Simmons to have plaintiff write another memo. Simmons relayed this request to Sergeant Voss. Voss asked plaintiff for another memo, advising him that the one he had submitted was "not the memo that Captain Bratcher wanted due to it did not say anything about me speaking about the good ol boy system."15 Plaintiff said that he would write another memo but "asked if there was a way to get an email or something in writing about what to do[.]"16 Plaintiff contends that he was concerned that writing about the good old boy system reference could be a policy violation (making disparaging remarks about the Sheriff's Office). Two other deputies were present in the room during Voss' conversation with plaintiff about the memo. Voss emailed Simmons to advise him of his conversation with plaintiff.17 Voss wrote that plaintiff stated that he wanted the request to write a memo about the good old boy 14 Exhibit 9, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 15 Exhibit 11 at 2, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 16 Id. 17 Exhibit 7, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. -5- system in writing "and that he was going to discuss it with a lawyer and or AZCOPS."18 Later in the day on October 15, 2012, Simmons placed plaintiff on administrative leave and advised plaintiff that an administrative investigation (AI investigation) would be conducted.19 Sergeant Jason Amon conducted the AI investigation. The three charges against plaintiff were insubordination, satisfactory performance, and public criticism.20 Amon interviewed plaintiff, Lehr, Voss, and Simmons. Prior to his interview with Amon, plaintiff was advised of his rights regarding the interview21 and was given and signed a copy of A.R.S. § 38-1101, which provides, among other things, standards or rules for interviewing law enforcement officers.22 18 Id. AZCOPS is the Arizona Conference for Police and Sheriffs, of which plaintiff was a member at the time of the events in question. Declaration of Douglas Clabaugh at 1, ¶ 11, Exhibit 2, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 19 Exhibit 11 at 2, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32; Exhibits 8 & 9, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. Conducting the investigation was consistent with the Sheriff's Office's disciplinary policies which provide that "[t]he Yuma County Sheriff's Office will investigate all allegations of personnel misconduct and suspected conduct." Exhibit 19 at Clabaugh000074, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 20 Exhibit 1 at Yuma County 14, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 21 Exhibit 10, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 22 Exhibit 11, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. -6- During the interview, Amon asked plaintiff if he "made the comment that you thought [the Sheriff's Office] was a good ole boy system" and plaintiff replied, "No I did not. I was referring to what I've heard."23 Plaintiff also explained that he asked for the order to be in writing because he thought he was being asked to violate the public criticism policy "where it says where you won't put in writ[ing] where you will slander."24 In Lehr's interview with Amon, Lehr stated that plaintiff said "he was voting for Sandoval and he was tired of all the good ole boy stuff going on with the Department."25 On October 26, 2012, Simmons advised Bratcher that he (Simmons) had reviewed the results of the AI investigation and found the charges to be sustained.26 Simmons found that plaintiff "failed to carry out a lawful order given by a Supervisor on not one but two occasions" and "[h]e also made comments which criticized the department and the Sheriff reference to 'good ole boy attitudes[.]'"27 Simmons recommended that plaintiff "receive 160 hours without pay and be placed on a two year reckoning period and receive a PPR 23 Exhibit 1 at Yuma County 15, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 24 Id. at Yuma County 16. 25 Exhibit 2 at Yuma County 20, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 26 Exhibit 12 at Yuma County 28, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 27 Id. -7- entry reference to the findings."28 Simmons "briefed" plaintiff "on the findings of th[e] investigation on 10/26/12 and advised that the Administrative Investigation would now be forwarded to [Bratcher] for review."29 On October 29, 2012, Bratcher reviewed the results of the AI investigation and wrote a memo to the file regarding his review.30 Bratcher found that the three charges had been sustained.31 Bratcher concluded that plaintiff did knowingly and intentionally engage in speech which was malicious and without regard for the truth. Upon being given an order to document his concerns, so that I could address any issues, Deputy Clabaugh refused to comply with that order on two separate occasions. Deputy Clabaugh has further demonstrated his lack of regard for his conduct by denying he had any complaints and was only repeating what he had heard. Deputy Clabaugh is further incapable or unwilling to identify what any of his concerns are, yet he had no difficulty in voicing them unsolicited to a fellow employee.[32] 28 Id. 29 Id. 30 Plaintiff makes much of the fact that Bratcher did not personally speak to Lehr about his conversation with plaintiff. Deposition of Eben Bratcher at 19:8-20:2, Exhibit 4, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 31 Exhibit 12 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 32 Id. -8- Bratcher wrote that "[b]ased on my findings, Deputy Clabaugh's employment with the Yuma County Sheriff's Office is hereby TERMINATED."33 On October 30, 2012, Bratcher met with plaintiff and advised plaintiff that his recommendation was that plaintiff be terminated but that he would meet with plaintiff again on November 13, 2012.34 Bratcher again requested that plaintiff write a memo outlining any complaints plaintiff had with the Sheriff's Office.35 On November 7, 2012, plaintiff wrote a memo in response to Bratcher's October 30, 2012 request. Plaintiff wrote that his "only complaint ... is the Administrative Investigation that I am currently under going."36 Plaintiff also wrote that [a]s far as the good ol boy definition as asked for, I found it on the internet under Wikipedia. It can be used as a pejorative term, referring to someone who engages in cronyism (long standing friends doing favors for friends), among men who have known each other for a long period of time. 33 Id. 34 Exhibit 11 at 3, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. This meeting was consistent with the Sheriff's Offices disciplinary policies which provided that "[t]he Bureau Commander or his/her designate will meet with the employee upon completion of the investigation." Exhibit 19 at Clabaugh 000077, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. Consistent with policy, Mejia-Rico attended this meeting as well because the "recommended sanction(s) involve[d] an economic loss [for] the employee." Id.; Bratcher Deposition at 27:10-19, Exhibit 4, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 35 Exhibit 11 at 3, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 36 Exhibit 10 at 1, Plaintiff's Controverting Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 36. -9- As stated previously several times, I did not make this statement about the Office or any persons. If I had an issue with an employee I would speak to them about the issue and resolve it. This statement was said in reference to what I have heard in the past and was made in reference to negative comments that Mr. Lehr was making about the elections, like an example. There was nothing negative meant by the example.[37] On November 15, 2012, plaintiff was advised that Bratcher had not changed his mind and plaintiff was asked to, and did, sign the termination memo that Bratcher had drafted on October 29, 2012.38 Plaintiff was also given a Notice of Dismissal.39 The Notice provided: You are hereby notified that you will be dismissed from employment with this office/department effective as of the following date: If you do not respond to this notice by Monday, November 26th, 2012 by 1700 hours. Termination will be effective on Tuesday, November 27th, 2012 at 0800 hours.[40] On November 26, 2012, plaintiff requested "a hearing on [his] dismissal."41 Plaintiff requested that the hearing be with the Sheriff and submitted a four-page response to the 37 Id. at 1-2. 38 Exhibit 13 at Yuma County 30, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 39 Exhibit 14, Plaintiff's Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 40 Id. at 1. 41 Id. at 2. -10- charges against him.42 In his response, plaintiff explained his version of the events and reiterated that he did "not have any complaints with anyone or any other grievances, other than this Administrative Investigation...."43 On November 26, 2012, defendant notified plaintiff that the hearing would be held on November 30, 2012. The Hearing Notice advised plaintiff that he would have the right to testify at the hearing and could bring witnesses to testify on his behalf.44 The Notice also advised that "[i]f you have retained a representative to represent you, that representative may be permitted to examine witnesses [the Sheriff] called to testify."45 Plaintiff was represented at the hearing by Julie McDonald, a local attorney.46 McDonald was told by Ogden and Norazel Mejia-Rico, the Human Resources Supervisor for the Sheriff's Office, that she (McDonald) was there only as an "observer" and that she 42 Exhibit 11 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. Plaintiff could have requested a hearing before a group of his peers rather than a hearing before the Sheriff. Exhibit 19 at Clabaugh 000079-81, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 43 Exhibit 11 at 4, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 44 Exhibit 21 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 45 Id. 46 McDonald had been asked to step in for Eric Frost, the Area President of the Yuma Deputies Association, because he was unable to attend the hearing. McDonald believed that the hearing was to be a pre-termination hearing. -11- would not be allowed to speak. McDonald was however not "constrained" from giving plaintiff advice during the hearing.47 Shortly before the hearing, plaintiff was provided with a copy of the AI investigation file,48 which he had not requested until that morning after Mejia-Rico asked him if he wanted a copy of it. At the hearing itself, plaintiff was provided a list of witnesses and copies of documents that defendant intended to use during the hearing. Mejia-Rico testified that at that time it was typical for defendant to place a packet of information on the employee's chair or at the table that includes, among other things, "an outline of who's gonna be present, the charges, the definitions of the alleged rule violations, and any summaries of previous administrative investigations."49 The hearing was short, lastly approximately 20 minutes. Amon and Bratcher appeared as witnesses and plaintiff was given an opportunity to tell his side of the story.50 Amon testified that during the conversation with Lehr, plaintiff "made comments that was, 47 Deposition of Julie McDonald at 23:12-16, Exhibit 20, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 48 The AI investigation file contained, among other things, transcripts of Amon's interviews and the recordings of those interviews. 49 Deposition of Norazel Mejia-Rico at 25:7-10, 43:11-18, & 44:7-15, Exhibit 16, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 50 Exhibit 15 at Yuma County 58, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. -12- he was tired of the 'good ole boy' system at the Sheriff's Office"51 and that an investigation ensued as a result of these comments. During the hearing, plaintiff asked if the two deputies who had witnessed the conversation between him and Voss had been interviewed.52 Amon replied that "nobody is debating the fact that you stated you would write a memo ... [s]o talking to them is regardless."53 Plaintiff was asked if he wanted to call Lehr, Simmons, and/or Voss as witnesses so that plaintiff could question them, but plaintiff stated that "I don't need them."54 At the close of the hearing, Ogden asked Mejia-Rico if "we followed the policy for the Yuma County Sheriff's Office as far as this hearing goes or as far as this investigation goes?"55 Mejia-Rico replied, "Yes, Sir."56 The same question was posed to Felicia Medina, 51 Id. at Yuma County 56. Plaintiff repeatedly mentions that this statement by Amon during the hearing conflicts with Amon's testimony during his deposition. At his deposition, Amon testified that he was unable to determine whether the "good old boy system" remark was made in reference to plaintiff's own personal belief or whether it was based on what others believed. Deposition of Sergeant Jason Amon at 31:12-17, Exhibit 6, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 52 Exhibit 15 at Yuma County 63, Plaintiff's Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 53 Id. 54 Id. at Yuma County 62. 55 Id. at Yuma County 64. 56 Id. -13- defendant's Director of Human Resources, and she gave the same reply.57 However, MejiaRico has since admitted that defendant did not comply with A.R.S. § 38-1101 when conducting plaintiff's hearing.58 Subsection (A)(3) of A.R.S. § 38-1101 provides that [a]fter an employer completes an investigation of a law enforcement officer or probation officer if the employer seeks disciplinary action at the request of the law enforcement officer or probation officer, the employer shall provide a basic summary of any discipline ordered against any other law enforcement officer or probation officer of generally similar rank and experience employed by the employer within the previous two years for the same or a similar violation. Mejia-Rico testified that defendant would have provided plaintiff with the summary contemplated in Subsection (A)(3) if he had requested it, but that he never requested the summary so one was never provided.59 Subsection E of A.R.S. § 38-1101 sets forth specific requirements for an "appeal of a disciplinary action by a law enforcement officer or probation officer[.]" In any such appeal, 57 Id. 58 Mejia-Rico Deposition at 58:22-24, Exhibit 16, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 59 Id. at 40:10-23. -14- the parties shall exchange copies of all relevant documents and a list of all witnesses pursuant to the following time periods and requirements: 1. Within three business days after the employer's receipt of a written request from the law enforcement officer or probation officer for a copy of the investigative file that is accompanied by a copy of the filed notice of appeal, the employer shall provide a complete copy of the investigative file as well as the names and home or work mailing addresses of all persons interviewed during the course of the investigation. 2. No later than ten business days before the appeal hearing, the parties shall produce and serve on every party the following information: (a) The name of each witness whom the disclosing party expects to call at the appeal hearing, with a designation of the subject matter of which each witness might be called to testify.... (b) The name and contact information of each person who has given statements, whether written or recorded, signed or unsigned, regarding matters relevant to the notice of discipline and the custodian of the copies of those statements. (c) The copies of any documents that may be introduced at the hearing and that have not previously been disclosed. It is undisputed that defendant did not provide plaintiff the names of witnesses with a designation of the subject matter of their testimony at least ten days prior to the hearing. It is also undisputed that defendant did not provide plaintiff the names and contact information of anyone who had given a statement regarding the matter at least ten days prior to the hearing. It is also undisputed that defendant did not provide plaintiff with -15- copies of any documents that might be introduced at the hearing at least ten days prior to the hearing.60 On December 7, 2012, Ogden issued his final decision sustaining "the recommended sanctions and order[ing] that Deputy Clabaugh be terminated from employment by the Yuma County Sheriff's Office effective at 1600 hours on December 7, 2012."61 Ogden found that plaintiff's "memos were non-responsive to the information he was instructed to provide and his refusal to write the memo without a written order ... did in fact violate the Policy regarding Insubordination and Satisfactory Performance."62 On December 17, 2012, plaintiff submitted a "formal written notice of appeal" of the December 7 decision to terminate him.63 Plaintiff submitted a second formal written notice of appeal on February 13, 2013.64 60 It is also undisputed that defendant's policies that were in place at the time of plaintiff's hearing made no reference to these statutory disclosure requirements. 61 Exhibit 23 at Yuma County 54, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 62 Id. 63 Exhibit 24 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 64 Exhibit 25 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. -16- On March 11, 2013, Leon Wilmot, the recently elected Sheriff, requested that Sheriff J. Adam Shepherd of Gila County review the decision to terminate plaintiff.65 Shepherd was provided a copy of the AI file and a transcript of the November 30, 2012 hearing.66 Shepherd found that the charges were supported and concluded that Ogden "was well within his right to make [the] decision" to terminate plaintiff.67 On May 24, 2013, plaintiff commenced this action in which he asserts a § 1983 Fourteenth Amendment due process claim based on allegations that he was not provided a meaningful hearing because Ogden was not an impartial hearing officer and because defendant did not comply with A.R.S. § 38-1101.68 Both parties now move for summary judgment on plaintiff's claim. Discussion Summary judgment is appropriate when there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The initial burden is on the moving party to show that there is an absence of genuine issues of material fact. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986). If the moving party meets 65 Exhibit 31, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 66 Id. at 1. 67 Exhibit 32 at Yuma County 82, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. 68 Complaint at 5, ¶¶ 36-37, Docket No. 1. -17- its initial burden, then the non-moving party must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 247-48 (1986). In deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court views the evidence of the non-movant in the light most favorable to that party, and all justifiable inferences are also to be drawn in its favor. Id. at 255. "[T]he court's ultimate inquiry is to determine whether the 'specific facts' set forth by the nonmoving party, coupled with undisputed background or contextual facts, are such that a rational or reasonable jury might return a verdict in its favor based on that evidence." T.W. Elec. Service, Inc. v. Pacific Elec. Contractors Ass'n, 809 F.2d 626, 631 (9th Cir. 1987). "Where the parties file cross-motions for summary judgment, the court must consider each party's evidence, regardless under which motion the evidence is offered." Las Vegas Sands, LLC v. Nehme, 632 F.3d 526, 532 (9th Cir. 2011). As an initial matter, defendant argues that it is entitled to summary judgment because plaintiff's § 1983 claim is based on a respondeat superior theory of liability and "there is no respondeat superior liability under § 1983." Ewing v. City of Stockton, 588 F.3d 1218, 1235 (9th Cir. 2009). A local government body, such as defendant, "cannot be held liable under § 1983 'solely because it employs a tortfeasor—or, in other words, a municipality cannot be held liable under § 1983 on a respondeat superior theory.'" Jackson v. Barnes, 749 F.3d 755, 762 (9th Cir. 2014) (quoting Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978)). -18- Local governing bodies can be held liable, however, where "the action that is alleged to be unconstitutional implements or executes a policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision officially adopted and promulgated by that body's officers," or where the action is made "pursuant to governmental 'custom' even though such a custom has not received formal approval through the body's official decisionmaking channels." Id. at 762-763 (quoting Monell, 436 U.S. at 690–91). "Under Monell, a local government body can be held liable under § 1983 for policies of inaction as well as policies of action." Id. at 763. "A policy of action is one in which the government body itself violates someone's constitutional rights, or instructs its employees to do so; a policy of inaction is based on a government body's 'failure to implement procedural safeguards to prevent constitutional violations.'" Id. (quoting Tsao v. Desert Palace, Inc., 698 F.3d 1128, 1143 (9th Cir. 2012)). Defendant argues that plaintiff's § 1983 claim is based on a policy of inaction because plaintiff is alleging that defendant's policy regarding disciplinary hearings failed to incorporate the procedural safeguards that were embodied in A.R.S. § 38-1101. "In inaction cases, the plaintiff must show, first, 'that [the] policy amounts to deliberate indifference to the plaintiff's constitutional right.'" Id. (quoting Tsao, 698 F.3d at 1143). "This requires showing that the defendant 'was on actual or constructive notice that its omission would likely result in a constitutional violation.'" Id. (quoting Tsao, 698 F.3d at 1145). "Second, the plaintiff must show 'that the policy caused the violation in the sense that the -19- municipality could have prevented the violation with an appropriate policy.'" Id. (quoting Tsao, 698 F.3d at 1143). Defendant argues that plaintiff cannot show that defendant was deliberately indifferent because it was not "obvious" that the failure to disclose documents and names of witnesses ten days prior to plaintiff's hearing would violate plaintiff's constitutional rights. Defendant argues that plaintiff already knew who the likely witnesses would be and that plaintiff or his counsel could have requested a continuance if they believed that additional time was needed. Thus, defendant insists that plaintiff's claim against it is nothing more than a claim for respondeat superior liability and that such a claim is barred. Plaintiff's § 1983 claim is not barred. Defendant may be liable here because the alleged deprivation of plaintiff's constitution rights was based on defendant's existing policies. Both Mejia-Rico and Medina confirmed during the November 30 hearing that the hearing complied with defendant's then-existing policies and Ogden testified that plaintiff's hearing complied with defendant's then-existing policies.69 It was defendant's "policy or custom" that has allegedly "caused [the] violation of [plaintiff's] constitutional rights." Assoc. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs v. County of Los Angeles, 648 F.3d 986, 993 (9th Cir. 2011). This is not a case in which defendant has failed to adopt any policies, but rather a case in which the policies that it has adopted were "the 'moving force' behind the 69 Ogden Deposition at 40:13-24, Exhibit 8, Plaintiff's Converting Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 36. -20- alleged constitutional violation." Jadwin v. County of Kern, Case No. 1:07–CV–00026–OWW-DLB, 2009 WL 2424565, at *15 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 6, 2009) (quoting Galen v. County of Los Angeles, 477 F.3d 652, 667 (9th Cir. 2007)). Turning then to the merits of plaintiff's § 1983 claim, "[t]he Fourteenth Amendment protects individuals against the deprivation of liberty or property by the government without due process." Portman v. County of Santa Clara, 995 F.2d 898, 904 (9th Cir. 1993). "A section 1983 claim based upon procedural due process thus has three elements: (1) a liberty or property interest protected by the Constitution; (2) a deprivation of the interest by the government; (3) lack of process." Id. Here, there is no dispute that plaintiff had a protected property interest in his employment and that he was deprived of that interest when he was terminated. Rather, the focus of the dispute between the parties is on whether there was a lack of process. "'Constitutional due process requires that a party affected by government action be given the opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.'" Miranda v. City of Cornelius, 429 F.3d 858, 866 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting Calif. ex rel. Lockyer v. F.E.R.C., 329 F.3d 700, 708 n.6 (9th Cir. 2003)). In determining what process is due, [the court] appl[ies] the factors specified by the Supreme Court in Mathews v. Eldridge: First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an errone-21- ous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail. Id. (quoting Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976)). What process is due is a question of law. Quick v. Jones, 754 F.2d 1521, 1523 (9th Cir. 1984). Although the parties do not discuss the Mathews factors, plaintiff had a strong interest in maintaining his employment, an interest that was affected by defendant's policies. And, defendant had a strong interest in making sure that issues such as insubordination within the Sheriff's Office were dealt with in a prompt manner. The factor that requires attention here is whether the procedures that defendant used "present[ed] a meaningful risk of an erroneous deprivation of [plaintiff']s interest." Bradford v. Union Pacific R. Co., 767 F.3d 865, 871 (9th Cir. 2014). Plaintiff contends that defendant's procedures in connection with the November 30 hearing were insufficient to protect against an erroneous deprivation of plaintiff's property interest in his employment. The determination of whether the process plaintiff was provided was sufficient hinges on whether the November 30 hearing was pre-termination hearing or a post-termination hearing. Plaintiff argues in his briefing on the instant -22- motions that the November 30 hearing was a pre-termination hearing.70 This argument is based on Ogden's testimony that Bratcher made a "recommendation" to terminate plaintiff but that plaintiff "wasn't terminated until about a week after — the hearing."71 Thus, plaintiff argues that the November 30 hearing was his pre-termination hearing, not his post-termination hearing. The November 30 hearing was a post-termination hearing, not a pre-termination hearing. First, all of the evidence suggests that the November 30 hearing was a posttermination hearing. The Notice of Dismissal that plaintiff was given on November 15, 2012 stated that plaintiff would be dismissed on November 27, 2012 unless he responded to the notice72 and that if he did not request a hearing within five days, his dismissal would be "final on the date the disciplinary order is filed with the clerk of the Board of Supervisors."73 Plaintiff signed a copy of Bratcher's memo to the file on November 15, 2012, which stated that plaintiff's "employment with the Yuma County Sheriff's Office is 70 This is contrary to what plaintiff alleged in his complaint. In his complaint, plaintiff alleges that the November 30 hearing was a post-termination hearing. Complaint at 5, ¶ 36, Docket No. 1. 71 Ogden Deposition at 13:17-24, Exhibit 8, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 72 Exhibit 14 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 73 Id. at 2. -23- hereby TERMINATED."74 Defendant's disciplinary policies provide that "[t]he hearing with the Sheriff is the concluding step in the disciplinary process and shall include a review of all investigative and administrative procedures occurring prior to the hearing to ensure due process was afforded the employee."75 In the 4-page memo that plaintiff submitted in connection with his request for the hearing before Ogden, plaintiff wrote that "[o]n 11/15/12 at about 1500 hours, Lieutenant Oberosler called me in and said Captain Bratcher was still out of town and his decision was still termination. I was provided with the termination paperwork and advised how to appeal."76 And, plaintiff himself testified that at the time of the hearing, he "assumed" that he was going to be terminated unless Ogden decided not to follow Bratcher's recommendation.77 Second, the fact that Ogden was the final decision maker does not mean that the November 30 hearing was not a posttermination hearing. In order for the hearing to be meaningful, Ogden had to have the authority to make the final decision. Finally, it is worth noting that much of plaintiff's argument is based on his contention that he did not receive the disclosures required by 74 Exhibit 12 at 1, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 75 Exhibit 19 at Clabaugh000082, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 76 Exhibit 11 at 3, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. 77 Clabaugh Deposition at 84:1-10, Exhibit 3, Defendant's Separate Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 33. -24- A.R.S. § 38-1101 within the timeframes set forth in that statute. Section 38-1101(E) sets forth the procedures to be followed "[i]n any appeal of a disciplinary action by a law enforcement officer or probation officer[.]" A.R.S. § 38-1101(E) (emphasis added). If the November 30 hearing were a pre-termination proceeding, as plaintiff now argues, defendant would not have had any reason to comply with A.R.S. § 38-1101(E). Turning then to the adequacy of the post-termination procedures that were provided to plaintiff, in his opening brief, plaintiff argued that his procedural due process rights were violated because defendant did not comply with A.R.S. § 38-1101. Plaintiff complained that defendant 1) failed to provide him with the names of witnesses and the subject matter of their expected testimony at least ten days prior to the November 30 hearing, 2) failed to provide to him with the name and contact information of each person who gave a statement regarding the incident at least ten days prior to the November 30 hearing, and 3) failed to provide to him copies of documents that might be used as evidence at the hearing at least ten days prior to the hearing. However, after defendant pointed out that there is no per se violation of the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause simply because a state statutory procedure is not followed, Martin v. City of Glasgow, Ky., 882 F. Supp. 2d 903, 910 (W.D. Ky. 2012), plaintiff abandoned this argument, instead arguing that defendant's failure to comply with A.R.S. § 38-1101 was only one factor to consider when -25- determining whether his due process rights were violated.78 Plaintiff insists that when the totality of circumstances of considered here, the procedures that defendant provided were not adequate. The totality of the circumstances here, according to plaintiff are that 1) defendant did not timely make the disclosures required by A.R.S. § 38-1101, 2) defendant gave him only three days notice of the November 30 hearing,79 3) the hearing only lasted about 20 minutes, 4) his counsel was not allowed to speak at the hearing, and 5) the hearing was conducted by Ogden, rather than an independent hearing officer, such as a sheriff from a different county. Plaintiff insists that under these circumstances it is clear that he was not afforded sufficient due process in connection with the November 30 hearing. While it is undisputed that defendant did not provide disclosures within the timeframes provided in A.R.S. § 38-1101, plaintiff had multiple opportunities to raise any 78 Defendant's argument that plaintiff waived his right to object to any procedural irregularities in connection with A.R.S. § 38-1101 is unavailaing. "A waiver of a constitutional right is 'not to be implied and is not lightly to be found.'" Ostlund v. Bobb, 825 F.2d 1371, 1373 (9th Cir. 1987) (quoting United States v. Provencio, 554 F.2d 361, 363 (9th Cir. 1977)). It is not reasonable to infer that plaintiff was waiving his right to the procedures set out in A.R.S. § 38-1101 simply because neither plaintiff nor his lawyer objected to the untimely disclosures on the day of his hearing. 79 At her deposition, plaintiff's counsel asked Mejia-Rico, in reference to the Hearing Notice that plaintiff was given, whether it was typical for defendant to give 2 1/2 to 3 days notice of a "post-termination" hearing. Mejia-Rico Deposition at 23:14-24:1, Exhibit 16, Plaintiff's Controverting Statement of Facts [etc.], Docket No. 36. Mejia-Rico replied, "Yes." Id. at 24:3. -26- issues concerning the timely disclosure of evidence and witness lists. Plaintiff could have requested a continuance or plaintiff could have submitted additional information after the hearing but before Ogden made his decision. Moreover, plaintiff knew who the witnesses were even though there had been no formal disclosure. Plaintiff was provided a copy of Bratcher's memo, which identified witnesses and the subject matter of their testimony, by at least November 15. As for plaintiff's contention that he did not get a summary of discipline concerning other employees as required by A.R.S. § 38-1101, the statute only requires that such a summary be provided if the employee requests it and plaintiff never requested that a summary be provided to him. As for the short notice, plaintiff implies that this gave him inadequate time to prepare for the hearing. But, plaintiff knew by November 15 that he was facing termination so he could have begun preparing for the hearing then. And again, if plaintiff believed he had inadequate time to prepare, he could have requested that the hearing be continued. To the extent that plaintiff is arguing that the short notice did not give his lawyer adequate time to prepare, the fact that McDonald began representing plaintiff the morning of the hearing was not due to the short notice. Rather, the evidence in the record indicates that plaintiff had intended to have a union representative come to the hearing with him but that McDonald stepped in at the last moment because the union rep was not going to be available. -27- As for the length of the hearing, plaintiff points to no requirement that a hearing must be of a certain length in order to comport with due process, and the length of the hearing in this case does not indicate that it was not a meaningful hearing. Two witnesses were called; plaintiff was give two opportunities to give his side of the story; and plaintiff was asked if he wanted to call Lehr, Simmons, and/or Voss as witnesses so that plaintiff could question them. To the extent that plaintiff is arguing that his hearing was not meaningful because the two deputies who had overheard the conversation between him and Voss were not called as witnesses, during the hearing, plaintiff did not request that these individuals be called as witnesses. Rather, plaintiff asked if the two deputies had been interviewed.80 Moreover, plaintiff could have called the two deputies as witnesses if he believed they had critical information. The Hearing Notice advised plaintiff that he could call witnesses at the hearing. As for Ogden being the hearing officer, "[d]ue process can permit the same administrative body to investigate and adjudicate a case[,]" if "different persons perform[] the investigative and decisionmaking functions." Walker v. City of Berkeley, 951 F.2d 182, 185 (9th Cir. 1991). Because Ogden played no part in the investigation, Ogden was not precluded from acting as the hearing officer at plaintiff's hearing. 80 Exhibit 15 at Yuma County 62-63, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. -28- As for McDonald being told she was there only as an observer, McDonald could have requested permission to cross-examine the witnesses at the hearing. The Notice of Disciplinary Hearing that plaintiff was given expressly advised that "[i]f you have retained a representative to represent you, that representative may be permitted to examine witnesses [the Sheriff] called to testify."81 If McDonald failed to request permission because she was confused as to whether the hearing was a post-termination hearing or a pretermination hearing, that confusion was due to plaintiff retaining McDonald at the last minute and not because of anything defendant did or did not do. In sum, the post-termination hearing that plaintiff was provided was constitutionally adequate. "'At a minimum, [a meaningful post-termination hearing] requires that the discharged employee be permitted to attend the hearing, to have the assistance of counsel, to call witnesses and produce evidence on his own behalf, and to know and have an opportunity to challenge the evidence against him.'" Baker v. City of SeaTac, 994 F. Supp. 2d 1148, 1166 (W.D. Wash. 2014) (quoting Carter v. Western Reserve Psychiatric Habilitation Ctr., 767 F.2d 270, 273 (6th Cir. 1985)). Here, plaintiff had counsel present at the hearing; he was given an opportunity to tell his side of the story at the hearing; he had the ability to call witness; and he knew what the evidence was against him and had an opportunity to challenge that evidence. In addition, defendant had a Sheriff from another 81 Exhibit 21, Plaintiff's Statement of Material Facts [etc.], Docket No. 32. -29- county review the decision to termination plaintiff. While plaintiff was not given an opportunity to participate in this independent review, it nonetheless provided an additional safeguard against an erroneous deprivation of plaintiff's property interest in his continued employment. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment82 is denied and defendant's motion for summary judgment83 is granted. The clerk of court shall enter judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint with prejudice. DATED at Anchorage, Alaska, this 20th day of November, 2014. /s/ H. Russel Holland United States District Judge 82 Docket No. 31. 83 Docket No. 34. -30-


text:
Q: Time limit on individual threads with ExecutorService I have an ExecutorService managing a number of Callables. The tasks that the Callables run are mostly black box transformations and number crunching. Under certain conditions, the data being transformed will oscillate and the thread will take over an hour to finish. For comparison, most threads are completed within a minute.
It's been deteremined that the data from the long-running threads is not relevent. I would like to interrupt any thread that runs longer than a certain amount of time. What would the best way to do this?

A: You could cancel the future etc as in the other answers, but you need to make sure that your threads which are "number crunching" can handle the interrupt and terminate gracefully. You say that this a black box operation - how certain are you that the interrupted status of the thread is being checked actively within the black box? If it isn't, you can't cancel it with an interrupt. The black box needs to be written with interruption in mind.

A: The best way for you to do this would be to introduce one more Executor.  You can use a ScheduledExecutorService to cancel all long running tasks for example:
ExecutorService service = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(N);

ScheduledExecutorService canceller = Executors.newScheduledThreadPool(1);

public void executeTask(Callable<?> c){
   final Future<?> future = service.submit(c);
   canceller.schedule(new Runnable(){
       public void run(){
          future.cancel(true);
       }
    }, SECONDS_UNTIL_TIMEOUT, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
}

A: Use a ScheduleExecutorService to schedule a task to taskFuture.cancel(true) the long running task when the timeout is reached.  If the task finishes before then it won't be cancelled.
ExecutorService service = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(N);
ScheduledExecutorService canceller = Executors.newSingleThreadScheduledExecutor();

public <T> Future<T> executeTask(Callable<T> c, long timeoutMS){
   final Future<T> future = service.submit(c);
   canceller.schedule(new Callable<Void>(){
       public Void call(){
          future.cancel(true);
          return null;
       }
    }, timeoutMS, TimeUnit.MILLI_SECONDS);
   return future;
}

A: You could get a list of your corresponding Futures (that are created when you submit a Callable) together with its startup time.
Another task could then check every minute if there are some task running for more than a defined time and if so, invoke cancel(true) in the Future. Done futures would be removed off the list.

A: You can use this method
<T> List<Future<T>> invokeAll(Collection<? extends Callable<T>> tasks,
                              long timeout,
                              TimeUnit unit)
                          throws InterruptedException

and set the maximum timeout to one minute. If your thread takes more than that it is just aborted.

A: The problem is you can not kill/stop/suspend the java thread.
All are deprecated.
future.cancel will only considered before worker thread
So if the thread is stuck with any code execution and doesn't have the logic to consider the thread interruption, then execution will still continue.
This is even true for executorService.shutdown();.
The documentation says.

There are no guarantees beyond best-effort attempts to stop processing
actively executing tasks. For example, typical implementations will
cancel via Thread. interrupt, so any task that fails to respond to
interrupts may never terminate.

So the only solution is to log such a situation and fix the inherent issue.
    Future<?> future = executor.submit(task);
    try {
        future.get(15, TimeUnit.MINUTES);
    } catch (InterruptedException e) {
        // retry waiting. iterative approach not shown here
    } catch (ExecutionException e) {
        // your task exploded
    } catch (TimeoutException e) {
        // The task is running longer than usual
        // Log it for future analysis

        //If the interrupt signal is handled
        //OR the task is stuck in the queue itself for a long time
        //then worth calling below
        future.cancel(true);
    }

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Wonderful post! And I couldn't help but be amused...for as I sat here reading your entry, The Magician's Nephew by Lewis is playing in the background on the CD player to the rapt attention of my children.
Our hope is in Christ alone and this is not our Home/Heaven, Praise the Lord!
To all: I am out of country for several days with no computer, phone or email access. I regret having to place comments on moderation, but without access to a computer, I need to control the comments on my site.
Look forward to posting after Easter!


CLOUD as a concept has been around for two decades but has picked up steam with the growing presence of 'hyper-scale' cloud providers in big data, analytics, artificial intelligence, and IoT. Today, the cloud is a compelling proposition for the Indian SMEs, enterprises and government.
In light of this the National Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM), unveiled its report titled 'Cloud – Next Wave of Growth in India'. The report was done in collaboration with Google Cloud and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India LLP highlights the present and the future state of the Indian cloud market, identifies the major technology trends, issues and concerns with respect to the industry.
It also focuses on the adoption levels of cloud computing across industry verticals, the IaaS and SaaS ecosystem and, analyses the cloud policy framework & its impact on the overall cloud industry.
The report highlights that cloud spending is on a growth trajectory propelled by factors (both demand and supply) such as Increased awareness of Cloud, consumerisation of IT, the proliferation of start-up ecosystem, diverse landscape of supplier ecosystem, rising investments in infrastructure, talent, strategic partnerships and the impetus from key digital-led Government programs. And here, both IaaS and SaaS are estimated to contribute to this growth. Factors that can drive the IaaS uptake in India are – an improved infrastructure, economic benefits, increased innovation, vibrant start-up ecosystem, and connected ecosystem.
On the other hand, lower cost of workforce, abundant talent availability, mature sales eco-system, adoption of newer technologies like AI, ML to build world-class products will boost the SaaS ecosystem.
Sharing her views on the report Debjani Ghosh, president, NASSCOM said, "India's cloud computing market is poised for growth and, the technology is increasingly being embraced across businesses as well as consumers. Complementing the ecosystem are the futuristic technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Advanced Analytics and Immersive media that are aiding in the seamless adoption of SaaS, IaaS and PaaS offerings. However, to bolster India's cloud market story we need to exercise innovation. Innovation to reduce the cost of services and thus, wider usage of the cloud. This report will be a ready reckoner for all to understand the imminent need for Cloud and the underlying opportunities".
The report also draws attention to a few challenges such as data security and lack of internet infrastructure especially in Tier-II and rural markets of India. However, holistically cloud spending is catching up fast and some of the key drivers are consumerisation of information technology, availability of skilled talent with deep domain knowledge, rising investments in infrastructure, government initiatives in support of cloud computing, emerging technologies such as AI (Artificial Intelligence) and ML (Machine Learning) and impetus from key digital-led Government programs enabling cloud growth among others. Globally, the cloud spending on IT is growing at 16.5 per cent (CAGR) and is expected to touch USD 345 billion by 2022.


However, having to scour the internet For e-cigs, mods, vaporizers, and also what not needed can be exceedingly time-consuming. This is the reason Vapornation is creating waves in the industry by being a full, one-stop-shop for all your vaping needs.
VaporNation is a Really amazing store with a few truly unique suggestions for customizing your vaping experience. It is possible to sort through their selection by what type of vape you need i.e., desktop, portable, or pencil, and whether you prefer to vape dry herb or focus. Then they set you with some of the greatest brands in today's market for example Storz & Bickel, Firefly, Atmos, or Innokin. You can guarantee you will end up with the vape that is perfect for your style and at a excellent price too. To check out a few of the innovative vapes that VaporNation provides, head over to our finest dry herblist of 2017.
Right on The homepage, VaporNation allows you to choose what type of vape you are searching for and exactly what material you need to utilize, to help you find the perfect vaporizer to coincide with your vaping tastes. They have a ton of top brands to select from which are both aesthetically pleasing and tech savvy. They offer free shipping on ALL orders provided that they are over $10 plus they have different shipping options to select from. You may expect your package to be delivered to you discreetly without a mention of vaping on the bundle.
Repair Problems with your order by returning it within 30 days for a full refund but ensure that the item is unopened and unused. Note that VaporNation won't accept certain components or accessories due to hygiene difficulties and if anything is broken or missing, just tell them within 72 hours of shipping. Contacting VaporNation is easy to perform; just pick up the phone or take them an email using the updated VaporNation phone number and email from the contact page on their website.
While the store does provide options For the e-cig user, Vapornation concentrates more on vaporizers for medical marijuana users. Brands such as Vapir, Magic Flight, 7th Floor, and Storz and Bickel and more can be found here. If a person is looking for a certain model that can't be found in the main menu, they could either use the search bar or click on the"more" link. The number of brands and products they have in stock is impressive, among the most comprehensive compared to other online stores.
For new users, it is easy to Become overwhelmed with the sheer amount of options laid out in front of you. To assist you select the right vaporizer, Vapornation has a unique buyer guide that walks you through your needs and wants.
How it works is, first, users Are asked to choose whether they're searching for a desktop computer or portable vaporizer. Then, the consumer is asked what material they intend to utilize. Then, the heat source depends upon — one can choose between battery, butane, or by flame. Once that is done, many items are suggested, and customers have the choice to compare, examine all of the results, or start over. It is a nifty tool, one that will prove useful to users.
If you do not know the difference Involving a whip style and a balloon design vaporizer or have no inkling what compelled air signifies, Vapornation has you covered. The company realizes that many new users aren't well-versed in the various phrases used in vaping, so that they set up a wonderful glossary that runs through a number of the standard terminologies one might experience.
The glossary explains the Differences between glass, filters, heating procedures, whip kits, and even vaporizer types. While the listing of phrases is not at all comprehensive, it is stocked with enough vaping information to help new users get in their way.
Newbie vapers are suggested to Take a look at the glossary first before making a decision, as it helps a lot in deciding what vaporizer is perfect for them.
Moreover, the Resources Section of the website includes an FAQ, testimonials, videos, instruction manuals, and many more. Taking the opportunity to undergo it is going to prove useful in the decision-making process, if you are a beginner or an advanced user looking for an update.
Vapornation can also be a very Foreign-friendly store. For starters, prices can be shifted from US Dollars to Canadian Dollars, Euros or British Pounds. Users may just pick the money they're most familiar. Even if one lives in Asia, with the choice to choose the currency shown, they'd have a better idea as to the value of the products.
VaporNation is based out of Southern California Plus they have a pleasant deal on transport. You get shipping free provided that your order is around $10 and you can adjust the shipping method as rush or 1-2 day but be ready to pay extra for this feature–needless to say. VaporNation also provides global shipping and in the event that you'd like to require signature upon delivery, you have the choice to do so.
An added bonus is that VaporNation makes discreet transport a priority, so no reference of vaping in your package. You can trust Vapor Country with your purchase and to get your package delivered punctually as we've purchased countless packages from VN with no lag time to talk of.
Warranties Vary based upon the product; nonetheless, VaporNation makes it easy to return your order if something goes wrong. Just send it back to them in 30 days unused and unopened and they'll provide you a full refund, however, they will give you a 15% restocking fee. VaporNation also notes that they won't take back certain parts and accessories due to hygienic reasons, naturally. If your vape is broken or missing components, VaporNation is great about caring for it as long as you inform them with 72 hours of shipping. Warranty doesn't go into effect unless you get the item in a broken state.
VaporNation Does have live chat on their website and you may either call them or email them. To seek out the most up-to-date contact information for VaporNation, see their website. VaporNation is quite good regarding customer service and will assist you with any issue you're having. They also have an FAQ section for answers to a lot of fundamental questions. To discover more about some of the smart, high-performing vapes they have available, check out our very best vape pencils of 2017 listing that's filled with goods offered over in the VaporNation online shop.
Vapornation goes out of its way To make matters simple for the clients. From the sheer size of goods available to the online glossary and 24-hour customer support, the company knows how to look after its clientele.
The Site may be a little Confusing at first, given the amount of products and alternatives out there. However, as a result of some well-organized menu program and very practical search bar, an individual will have the ability to browse the site with ease very quickly.
Few sites offer as much as Vapornation does, both in terms of product choice and useful details. When there is just one online vaporizer store you can see, make it Vapornation.


text:
Meta has built an AI research supercomputer called the SuperCluster, which is said to be the fastest in the world
On Monday, Meta, Facebook's parent company, announced the development of one of the world's fastest artificial intelligence supercomputers. The social media behemoth hopes that the machine will help develop the metaverse, a virtual reality construct that will eventually replace the Internet as we know it. According to Facebook, the computer will be the fastest in … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Meta, Meta SuperCluster, Meta supercomputer Leave a comment
Facebook Smartwatch Leaked Patent Shows Detachable Display and Camera
Facebook (now Meta) announced last year that it is working on a smartwatch that will be released in Summer 2022. The smartwatch will have a rounded screen and a front-facing camera. Bloomberg leaked the first image of the Meta smartwatch in October 2021. LetsGoDigital has obtained more information about Meta's first smartwatch. According to reports, … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Facebook Smartwatch, Meta, Meta Smartwatch, Smartwatch Leave a comment
Facebook Name Has Been Changed: It Is Now Called 'Meta'
October 29, 2021 by TechAlert24
yesterday, Facebook, which remains at the center of social media, released the expected statement. The name of the company has changed. The details are here: Facebook made headlines last week when it announced that it is considering renaming itself to better reflect its metaverse plans. Meta was chosen as the new name because it resembles … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Meta, Metaverse Leave a comment
Facebook apologies for the second outage in a week and services have been restored
Facebook Inc apologized to users for a two-hour outage on Friday, blaming the outage on another faulty configuration change. This is the company's second global outage this week. The latest outage impacted the company's social media platform, Instagram, Messenger, and Workplace, according to the company. "Please accept our sincere apologies to anyone unable to access … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Facebook outage Leave a comment
Telegram gained 70 million new users after WhatsApp, Facebook went down
Users all over the world were recently unable to access Facebook and its other services, such as WhatsApp and Instagram. The outage lasted more than 6 hours and cost Facebook millions of dollars in lost revenue. During the outage, however, the grass was greener for WhatsApp competitor Telegram, which gained millions of new followers. During … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, WhatsApp Leave a comment
WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook are down for users globally
All of Facebook's services, including WhatsApp, Instagram, and Messenger, are currently unavailable. The company confirmed this with tweets across its various corporate handles, including the Facebook app, Instagram, and WhatsApp (since Twitter is the only major social platform that is currently operational). It promised that the app would be back online soon, though the company … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp Leave a comment
Messenger now allows Instagram users to participate in group chats
September 30, 2021 by TechAlert24
Today, Facebook, which is at the heart of social media, and Instagram began a joint group period in message boxes. For a long time, the Facebook and Instagram message boxes have been combined. In fact, according to the company, this preference-based system has reached a 70 percent adaptation level. A new era begins here today … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Group chats, Instagram, Messenger Leave a comment
Instagram Kids app for children under the age of 13 has paused due to backlash
Instagram, a Facebook-owned photo-sharing app, announced on Monday that work on an "Instagram Kids" version for children under the age of 13 has been put on hold. The launch of "Instagram Kids" has been met with opposition from US lawmakers and advocacy groups, who have urged the social media giant to abandon its plans, claiming … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Instagram, Instagram Kids Leave a comment
Facebook Messenger Gets New Quick Reply Bar and new chat themes
June 11, 2021 by TechAlert24
Facebook Messenger new features won the market because it is one of the most widely used instant messaging applications. With its latest update, Fb Messenger introduces three new features that will be available to everyone soon. The first of these makes responding to video content easier. The "Quick Reply Bar" feature, as the company calls … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Facebook Messenger Leave a comment
Facebook Smartwatch With Two Cameras will Launch Next Summer
Anonymity According to Facebook sources who spoke to The Verge, the company is working on a smartwatch project. The screen of this smartwatch, according to sources, can be detached from the wrist, and it will be able to shoot videos and photos with the cameras it has. These photos will also be shared directly on … Read more
Categories News Tags Facebook, Facebook Smartwatch, Smartwatch Leave a comment

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Inside the stable legendary timepieces, Rolex watch has certainly acquired its place while dining, particularly with models such as the Submariner, that is as legendary just like a watch will get. Equally legendary to people who know timepieces, especially people that bear the Rolex watch coronet, might be the Rolex watch Explorer, which like the Submariner was introduced to everyone in 1953.
Because year, Mister Edmund Hillary had made mind lines around the globe because he increased being the initial guy to scale Mount Everest, arriving the summit on May 29th. He and individuals of his team used rolex milgauss replica watches which watches were produced much more famous by amazing capability to resist the rugged terrain and kinds of problems that might be located in the Himalayas.
Rolex watch made a decision to benefit from this recently found fame by supplying rolex explorer replica watches that paid out tribute to Hillary also to people who chose to research the world in many its most two opposites and remote locations and for that reason, the rolex gmt-master replica watches were produced. More Rolex watch Explorer watches have probably been much much deeper in your yard and greater round the land than almost every other watch made.
Many of the engineering work that joined the introduction of the Replica Omega Speedmaster watches accomplished good results from technical understanding acquired through the Himalayan expeditions inside the decades, which conspired making it most likely probably the most rugged of oyster perpetual models. It's due to this the Explorer, additionally to watches inside the Submariner line, are designated by Rolex watch within their Professional kind of rolex yachtmaster replica watches, serious tools for people that explore deep inside the ocean and earth or filled with the mountainous altitudes. Constantly provide the exam, these watches saved accurate time, maintained their water proof, were untouched by extreme temperature changes, snow, ice or dust the bottom line is, they passed just about any test that might be thrown their means by realistic conditions.


The Dallas Rattlers have signed attackman Zack Greer to a multi-year contract through the 2020 season.
Greer was originally selected by the Long Island Lizards in the first round (third overall) of the 2009 MLL Draft. The 2018 season will mark the Duke product's first return to MLL action since 2014 as a member of the Denver Outlaws championship-winning roster. In 36 career games, Greer has compiled 59 goals and 24 assists.
Greer was selected by the Rattlers in the fifth round (42nd overall) of the 2018 MLL Supplemental Draft. The 6'1", left-handed Greer adds size and agility to an impressive attack unit featuring former MLL All-Stars Jordan Wolf and Ned Crotty.
"This is a great team on the cusp of winning a championship, so I'm looking forward to joining this group, finding my role and seeing what I can do to help us accomplish that," said Greer.
The Rattlers first home game at Ford Center at The Star in Frisco will take place Sunday, April 29 at 2 p.m. Season tickets are on sale now by calling (800) 413-6109.
Shop new Rattlers apparel HERE.
Follow the Rattlers on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.


The Wired journalist Mat Honan has recently had his fill of cyber hacking when someone slipped through the Cloud system's security and into his digital life. Not only was his Gmail account deleted but the hacker also permanently reset his AppleID and Twitter passwords as well as wipe off his iPhone, iPad and Macbook remote access. This happened after the hacker contacted Amazon technical support and managed to get a hold of the last four digits of Honan's credit card number.
Over 80 percent of 4,000 businesses and IT managers worldwide are alarmed at this recent hack attack. In a survey conducted by the Ponemon Institute on behalf of Thales E-Security, these businesses and IT managers have considered transferring or have already transferred confidential data into the Cloud. Two thirds of this 80 percent think that the Cloud is solely responsible for protecting their confidential data and these organizations have little or no knowledge at all with regards to the security measures that their service providers have implemented to protect their clients' confidential data.
On the contrary, developers think that service providers are not the only ones responsible in protecting clients' confidential data. "Whether your data is on your own servers or in the cloud, it is still your data, and ensuring its security is ultimately your responsibility," said Richard Wang, manager of Sophos Labs U.S. in an interview with TechNewsWorld.


text:
Category » Appendix A
Goering
RIBBENTROP
KALTENBRUNNER
SAUCKEL
PAPEN
NEURATH
SCHIRACH
SEYSS-INQUART
KEITEL
JODL
RAEDER
DOENITZ
FRITZSCHE
The Avalon Project
Julius Streicher was a prominent member of the Nazi Party.
Streicher was born in Fleinhausen, Germany on February 12, 1885 and was the son of a teacher. He worked as an elementary school teacher until joining the German Army in 1914. Streicher won the Iron Cross and reached the rank of lieutenant by the time the Armistice was signed in 1918.
In 1919, Streicher co-founded the anti-Semitic organization Deutsch-Soziale Partei and two years later joined the the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP). In 1923, Streicher founded and edited the racist newspapers, Der Stuermer (1923-45) which he used to build up a deep hatred of the Jewish race. Eventually the newspaper reached a circulation of 800,000.
In the newspaper Streicher argued that the Jews were responsible for the depression, unemployment and inflation in Germany. He claimed that Jews were white-slavers and were responsible for over 90 per cent of the prostitutes in the country.
Streicher had a low IQ (102) and was considered by many observers to be insane. Despite this his newspaper and his speaking tours made him one of the best known leaders in Nazi Germany.
In 1940 he was deprived of all party offices after printing untrue stories about Hermann Goering. However he remained on good terms with Adolf Hitler.
Julius Streicher was found guilty of crimes against humanity at the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial. His last words before he was executed on October, 16, 1946, were, "Heil Hitler."
Sources: Spartacus; Robert S. Wistrich, Who's Who in Nazi Germany, Psychology Press, 2002, p.250.


text:
#pragma once

#include <memory>
#include <string>

#include "Eigen/Dense"

#include "modules/perception/lidar/common/lidar_error_code.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/interface/base_classifier.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/interface/base_segmentation.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/map_manager/map_manager.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/object_builder/object_builder.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/object_filter_bank/object_filter_bank.h"
#include "modules/perception/lidar/lib/pointcloud_preprocessor/pointcloud_preprocessor.h"

namespace apollo {
namespace perception {
namespace lidar {

struct LidarObstacleSegmentationInitOptions {
  std::string sensor_name = "velodyne64";
  bool enable_hdmap_input = true;
};

struct LidarObstacleSegmentationOptions {
  std::string sensor_name;
  Eigen::Affine3d sensor2novatel_extrinsics;

  EIGEN_MAKE_ALIGNED_OPERATOR_NEW
} EIGEN_ALIGN16;

class LidarObstacleSegmentation {
 public:
  LidarObstacleSegmentation() = default;
  ~LidarObstacleSegmentation() = default;

  bool Init(const LidarObstacleSegmentationInitOptions& options =
                LidarObstacleSegmentationInitOptions());

  LidarProcessResult Process(
      const LidarObstacleSegmentationOptions& options,
      const std::shared_ptr<apollo::drivers::PointCloud const>& message,
      LidarFrame* frame);

  LidarProcessResult Process(const LidarObstacleSegmentationOptions& options,
                             LidarFrame* frame);

  std::string Name() const { return "LidarObstacleSegmentation"; }

 private:
  LidarProcessResult ProcessCommon(
      const LidarObstacleSegmentationOptions& options, LidarFrame* frame);

 private:
  PointCloudPreprocessor cloud_preprocessor_;
  MapManager map_manager_;
  BaseSegmentation* segmentor_;
  ObjectBuilder builder_;
  ObjectFilterBank filter_bank_;
  // params
  std::string segmentor_name_;
  bool use_map_manager_ = true;
  bool use_object_filter_bank_ = true;
};  // class LidarObstacleSegmentation

}  // namespace lidar
}  // namespace perception
}  // namespace apollo

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Our operational experience allows us to develop the best strategic solutions for your enterprise. We have a specialized team that will conduct periodic visits to inspect your asset, analyzing infrastructure items such as electrical, hydraulic, air-conditioning, gardening, contracts, and others.
Through our technical reports, we will inform you about the good operating practices and identify items that require repair or maintenance. That way, you will be sure that your assets are well managed and in accordance with the required standards, ensuring periodic valuation.


Trusted car breakdown Service in Ahmedabad Customers Who Hold ''FastnSure Services Pvt. Ltd.'' Emergency Services Card Can Be Sure Of a Hassle Free Drive Across INDIA. In Case Any of your meets with any Minor Fault Or Meets With An Unfortunate Incident While Travelling, All They Have To Do Is To Call The FastnSure's 24 Hrs Helpline. Where they will be available for you at earliest.


text:
Racial Justice Vigil
This event is running from 9 July 2022 until 1 July 2023. It is next occurring on February 4, 2023 9:00 am
Categories: Community, interfaith, Racial Justice event
Tags: racial justice, social justice vigil, vigil
February 4, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
February 11, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
March 4, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
March 11, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
April 1, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
April 15, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
May 6, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
May 13, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
June 3, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
June 10, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
July 1, 2023 9:00 am – 10:00 am
Saturday morning at 9 join us as we stand for racial justice. Signs are available or bring your own. All are welcome!
This entry was posted by Fin Finley. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
class NullCompressor(object):
    @staticmethod
    def compress(data):
        return data

    @staticmethod
    def decompress(data):
        return data


text:
Convertible cribs 60x120
Twins convertible crib
Safety guards and accessories
Convertible crib mattresses
Co-sleeping cots
Co-sleeping cots 60x120
Co-sleeping cot accessories
Co-sleeping cot mattresses
Co-sleeping cots up to 3 years
White co-sleeping cots
Wooden co-sleeping cots
Large co-sleeping cots
Baby cots 60x120
Baby cots beds 70x140
Double cots for twins
Cots and cribs all-in-one
Montessori cots
Rattan cot
Baby cot mattressses
Co-sleeping cribs
Wooden co-sleeping cribs
Co-sleeping crib sheets
Co-sleeping crib bedding
Co-sleeping crib mattresses
Cribs with wheels
Crib bedding 50x80
Rattan crib
Rattan basket
Canopies for cribs & baskets
Montessori floor beds 70x140
Montessori junior beds 90x200
Floor beds for babies
Montessori cots 70x140
Montessori textiles
AUNA Montessori canopies
INDY Montessori canopies
HOMY Montessori canopies
HOMY XL Montessori canopies
Montessori bolsters
Montessori Wooden toys
Montessori bed mattresses
Nursing charis
Rocking chairs for babies
Baby dressers
Bath changers
Baby decoration
Cot textiles
Cot bedding 60x120
Duvet and bumper sets 60x120
Cot bumpers 60x120
Cot duvets 60x120
Cot duvets cover 60x120
Cot sheets 60x120
Junior bedding 90x200
Duvet 90x200
Duvet cover 90x200
Bath changing covers
Toweling liners
Cushions for babies' cots
Sleep positioners
Cojines protectores
Cojines rulo Montessori
Textile decoration
Garlands and pennants
Baby cots on sale
Offers on convertible cribs
Offers on co-sleeping cots
Kids furniture on sale
Maternity bags on sale
Cot beeding on sale
Baby's strollers offers
Flash offers
🔔 WINTER SALES | -15% in all of our products
Alondra › Press realeses › Interview with José Juan Femenía, ALONDRA's CEO
Interview with José Juan Femenía, ALONDRA's CEO
First of all, we want to congratulate you on the 25 years of experience that your company is about to complete since its inception in the mid-1980s. How were the beginnings? What has been its evolution during these years?
The origin is in the textile manufacturing workshop that my parents had and in which they manufactured for different basket companies. With their support, in 1985 we decided to launch our own basket collections with our new brand ALONDRA.
In 1999 we incorporated children's furniture to our range of products, designed by us and manufactured in subcontracted workshops. In January 2000 we presented our first collection in the national market, which had a great impact. Our first years in the children's furniture sector were not without difficulties, but they were very satisfying when we discovered that we could contribute new things. In 2002 we opened our own children's furniture factory. We currently have four work centers, two in Pedreguer, one in Beniarbeig (Alicante), and another in Silla (Valencia).
Reaching the quarter century is an important milestone at the business level. What do you think are the keys to achieving this goal?
Since our beginnings and year after year, we have always wanted to differentiate ourselves from others, create our own style. Our philosophy has been to design and launch collections with ALONDRA's own style, which stands out above the rest for its innovative character.
What figures does ALONDRA currently handle and what are its expectations for 2010 onwards?
As we have already mentioned, ALONDRA has four work centers, two of them for production and two for logistics distribution. It has points of sale spread throughout the Spanish geography, attended by 14 commercial agents.
At an international level, it has its own office in Milan (Italy), Lyon (France) and Mainz (Germany) and has a portfolio of more than 200 clients in these countries. It also distributes its products in Portugal, Greece, Cyprus, Finland, Romania, Hungary, Ukraine, Luxembourg, Qatar, etc. During this year 2010 and the next, the objective is to implant our brand in all the main European countries.
Tell us about ALONDRA's headquarters in the Alicante town of Beniarbeig. What departments does it house?
In September 2008 the company moved its offices to the new building within the Beniarbeig logistics center, acquired in 2003. It has 800 square meters dedicated to offices and 400 square meters of showrooms, built in 2007 with a very modern and innovative design. .
We have a team of 22 professionals in the departments of: management, design and R&D, quality, marketing, IT, administration, expeditions, customer service, sales, after-sales, purchasing, accounting, human resources and national and international commercial management . It is a very young work group with an average age of 30 to 35 years, which has a very entrepreneurial spirit and is totally customer-oriented.
What are the main axes of your supply, distribution and logistics strategy? How long are your products serving? How is the sales network structured? What is your pricing policy?
Our supply and distribution policy is based on continuous manufacturing to maintain significant stocks of all items in order to provide a good service to our customers.
ALONDRA was the first basket company nationwide to offer a 24-hour service. In furniture this is not possible, since transport through moving agencies makes it difficult to offer short delivery times. At present our service dates are 30 days in furniture and about 7-10 days in baskets, except for the novelties.
Our sales network is made up of 14 commercial agents that cover the entire national territory except the Canary Islands, Ceuta and Melilla, all of them led by our commercial director Paco Roig, with more than 18 years of experience in the company.
The current pricing policy for 2010 has been to maintain those of the previous year and even adapt some to the current situation. Our prices are not low compared to the industry. This is due to the fact that the manufacturing costs with the quality levels that we currently demand of all our furniture and textiles are high.
What services does ALONDRA offer that distinguish it from other companies?
We offer an extensive catalog of children's furniture to match with a complete range of textile baskets and numerous accessories to decorate all types of children's rooms. Our convertible cribs are very successful nationally and internationally. In addition, we have one of the largest catalogs in the sector, consisting of 240 pages and a stock coverage available at all times of 90% -95% of our articles in order to offer an urgent service to our customers.
How did you experience your first edition at Kind + Jugend (Cologne) as exhibitors?
In September 2008 we hired an export manager to start selling our products outside of Spain, opening up many new markets for us on the European continent this past year. The culmination of this first year of international voyage was in September 2009 at the Kind + Jugend fair in Cologne, where we presented our collection for the first time. As of today we are exporting to 15 countries and we are negotiating distribution agreements in 4 or 5 more countries.
ALONDRA already had export experience since the 1990s, when it sold its basket items to various European countries. When starting its journey in the children's furniture market, it was strategically decided to dedicate all the manufacturing and effort to introduce the brand nationwide and it was not until 2009 when it decided to open up to new markets, once both its implementation at the national level and its production capacity.
What comments can you make about the online sale of childcare articles in Spain?
Today it is a new type of business that we must all take into account in our expansion plans. The children's furniture market is complex to develop in this area due to transport and after-sales, but we foresee that in a few years all brands of children's furniture will also be available for sale online. Manufacturers and distributors should take into account for the future the opportunities offered by this new distribution platform, since not assuming it could mean losing their position in the sector.
What evolution do you think the childcare business is experiencing in the Spanish market? And internationally? How do you see its expansion?
In recent years, many specialized childcare businesses have been opened at the national level, which has resulted in the professionalization of the sector has increased.
At an international level, the furniture sector is totally oriented to the sale of children's rooms. The main change is to create exhibitions of complete and fully decorated children's rooms, directing the sale towards the decoration, personalization, prescription, advice and assembly of children's furniture.
There are still many stores nationwide that only sell cribs. In heavy childcare they have the best and most expensive brands and do not pay the same attention to furniture and decoration. Childcare specialists, apart from prescribing a whole range of children's furniture, must provide transportation and assembly services, as well as advise the client on the decoration of children's rooms. In some areas of the national territory it has been working in this way for a long time, despite which there are many others that will take a long time to implement this concept, which in our opinion is the trend for the future.
Tell us, what is the turnover of childcare in Spain? How is ALONDRA positioned and with what fee?
In recent years, almost all layette manufacturers have expanded their product range by introducing children's furniture and vice versa. The sale of children's furniture focuses mainly on the first baby and only a part of them acquires the complete room or convertible crib. This market is divided between 8 or 10 major brands, as well as some specialized franchises and small local manufacturers. Within children's furniture, our company is among the top three brands nationwide, with a market share of around 10%.
What are ALONDRA's short, medium and long term objectives and projects? What are your expectations for 2010 and 2011?
We have a large number of objectives within our strategic plan, among which it is worth highlighting:
- At an international level: consolidate the markets of France, Germany, Portugal and Italy, implementing our products in 90% of the areas of each country, and opening new markets in the rest of the European countries to which we do not yet export, thus as to countries of the Far East.
- At the national level: to retain even more loyalty to our best customers.
Interview published in Intercompany
Alondra Infantil | Posted on January 09 2011
hola@alondra.es
+34 965 00 25 25 (customers)
+34 966 45 72 90 (professionals)
Advantages and tips for choosing a convertible crib
How to safely co-sleep with a newborn baby
How to put the bumper in a convertible crib
How to store and preserve the baby's clothes?
How to warm and cover a newborn baby to sleep
How to put a newborn baby to sleep in a cot
Convertible cribs | Convertible co-sleeping cots | EQUO Co-sleeping crib | Montessori beds | Convertible cribs 60x120 | Convertible cribs 70x140
Cookie Policy | Privacy Policy | Legal Disclaimer
Alondra Warranty
Interior Designers and Professionals
Shipping Costs and Areas
Upstairs in-home delivery
Discount Vouchers
Buy Online or in Store
How to Buy (Guide)
Furniture Maintenance and Care
Press realeses
© 2023 ALONDRA Infantil S.L. Riu Vinalopó, 3 - 03778 BENIARBEIG, Alicante - Spain
Subscribe to our newsletter and get a practical guide that will help you set up the baby's room
In addition, you will be the first to receive our latest news, offers, etc...