Opinion ID: 73591
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: issues

Text: 3 The district court recognized that this document was new in the sense that the parties had not relied upon it in support of their motions for summary judgment. The document read, in part: 1) EPL will alter the date for the commencement of annual Software Support Services as specified in Part II, Section 2.01 from October 1, 1989 to January 1, 1990. This new date will become the annual renewal date for the remainder of the existing Agreement period. 2) U.S.A. agrees to bring current all outstanding invoices due to EPL and to agree to remit the annual Software Support Service fees based on the schedule as established in Item I. 5 The issue we decide is whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of EPL on USA's counterclaim for breach of the agreement. Specifically, we must decide whether disputed issues of material fact exist concerning (1) whether EPL breached paragraph 1.03(h) of the agreement through copying and marketing USA's translated VISION A program, and (2) whether EPL's invoices of January 1 and 14, 1994, were valid demands for payment for services under the remaining Initial Support Period.