Case Name: ELECTRO SOURCE, INC., a California Corporation, Electro Source, Inc. Plaintiff-counter-defendants Appellee v. AMERICAN BUSINESS INFORMATION, INC., a Nebraska Corporation Defendant, and; Infousa Inc., fka American Business Information, Inc., Defendant-x-claim-3rd-party Plaintiff-Appellant v. Micro Tech Marketing, Services, Inc., a California Corporation, Third-party-defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-08-01
Citations: 15 F. App'x 539
Docket Number: No. 00-55180; D.C. No. CV-98-08125-MMM
Parties: ELECTRO SOURCE, INC., a California Corporation, Electro Source, Inc. Plaintiff-counter-defendants Appellee v. AMERICAN BUSINESS INFORMATION, INC., a Nebraska Corporation Defendant, and Infousa Inc., fka American Business Information, Inc., Defendant-x-claim-3rd-party Plaintiff—Appellant v. Micro Tech Marketing, Services, Inc., a California Corporation, Third-party-defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before RYMER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 15
Pages: 539–540

Head Matter:
ELECTRO SOURCE, INC., a California Corporation, Electro Source, Inc. Plaintiff-counter-defendants Appellee v. AMERICAN BUSINESS INFORMATION, INC., a Nebraska Corporation Defendant, and Infousa Inc., fka American Business Information, Inc., Defendant-x-claim-3rd-party Plaintiff—Appellant v. Micro Tech Marketing, Services, Inc., a California Corporation, Third-party-defendant—Appellee.
No. 00-55180.
D.C. No. CV-98-08125-MMM.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted July 12, 2001.
Decided Aug. 1, 2001.
Before RYMER and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge.
Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge, United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
We affirm the judgments of the district court on both Appellee's claim for breach 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.
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.