Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10412/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10412-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10412

OPERATING TECHNICAL ELECTRONICS, INCORPORATED,

 Plaintiff–Appellee,

versus

GENERAC POWER SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED,

 Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:12-CV-345

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

This is an ordinary contract dispute governed by the Texas version of the 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 8, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-10412 Document: 00512893928 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/08/2015
No. 14-10412

Uniform Commercial Code, brought to federal court via diversity jurisdiction. 

The issue, broadly stated, is which actions during the negotiations constituted 

the offer and acceptance that formed a binding contract. 

We have reviewed the briefs, pertinent parts of the record, and the 

applicable law and have heard the helpful arguments of counsel. There is no 

error. The district court properly decided that the January 21, 2008, email 

from the plaintiff was the initial offer, so those terms applied, and that offer 

expressly limited acceptance to all of its terms. Defendant’s purchase order, 

sent on February 1, served as an acceptance of those terms, which plaintiff 

confirmed on February 8. We therefore need not make an Erie guess as to 

whether Texas applies the “knockout rule” to such negotiations.

AFFIRMED.

2

 Case: 14-10412 Document: 00512893928 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/08/2015