With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". is being sought. James J. White and Robert S. Summers, 1 Uniform Commercial Code, § 2.5, 66, 68-69 (4th ed 1995). See also, Ingrid Michelsen Hillinger, The Article 2 Merchant Rules: Karl Llewellyn’s Attempt to Achieve The Good, The True, The Beautiful in Commercial Law, 73 Geo U 1141 (1985) (explaining that the distinction between merchants and nonmerchants is an intentional one that creates a classification on which the UCC bases different rules and different results). Because the written “Order Confirmation” evidenced a contract, stated the quantity involved, and was signed by and bound the sender, it satisfied the merchant’s exception to the statute of frauds, as stated in ORS 72.2010(2). See, e.g., Fort Hill Lumber v. Georgia-Pacific, 261 Or 431, 436, 493 P2d 1366 (1972) (<HOLDING>). Cases in accord are collected in White and

A: holding that a seller could enforce an arbitration provision against a buyer even though only the buyer had signed the provision
B: holding that issuing a letter of counseling and a letter of reprimand was not a materially adverse employment action for purposes of a retaliation claim because the letter contained no abusive language andinstead contained jobrelated constructive criticism which can prompt an employee to improve her performance
C: holding that buyers letter signed only by buyer was sufficient to satisfy ors 7220102 where defendant seller argued that the letter contained indefinite and inconsistent terms
D: holding no enforceable contract where letter specified it was a letter of interest only and is subject to the negotiation and execution of a definitive agreement
C.