Opinion
Argued and Submitted July 12, 2001.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)
Appeal From the United States District Court for the Central District of California Margaret M. Morrow, District Judge, Presiding.
Before RYMER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge.
Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge, United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
We affirm the judgments of the district court on both Appellee's claim for breach
Page 540.
of contract and Appellant's claim for indemnity for the reasons stated therein. In addition, we reject Appellant's argument raised on appeal that the representation agreement entered into by Appellees related to all software to be distributed through "budget channels." There is nothing in the agreement that indicates that the language limiting the representation to "budget inventory" refers to the nature of retail outlets rather than the software itself. Thus, as Appellant has presented no further support for the proposition that Micro Tech's agency relationship with Electro Source covered the transaction at issue, the contract may not be rescinded under the "dual agency" theory.
AFFIRMED.