Agra-Associates, Inc., Plaintiff/counterclaim v. Pacific Scientific Company, Defendant/counterclaimant-Appellee

963 F.2d 378 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. AGRA-ASSOCIATES, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, v. PACIFIC SCIENTIFIC COMPANY, Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee. No. 90-35668. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 9, 1992. * Decided May 1, 1992. Before JAMES R. BROWNING, EUGENE A. WRIGHT and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 Agra-Associates, Inc. (Agra) appeals the district court's affirmance of a magistrate judge's order denying Agra leave to file a second amended complaint. Agra contends that it did not unduly delay in amending its complaint and that the amendment would not prejudice appellee Pacific Scientific Company (Pacific). Agra also appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment to Pacific. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 2 Pacific manufactures Near Infra Red (N.I.R.) agricultural feed testing equipment. Agra contracted with Pacific in May of 1984 to be Pacific's exclusive N.I.R. sales…