Daewoo Corp. v. Lockheed Corp.

97 F.3d 1458 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. DAEWOO CORPORATION, fka: Dae Woo Industrial Company, Ltd. Plaintiff-counter-defendant-Appellant, v. LOCKHEED CORPORATION, Defendant-counter-claimant-Appellee. No. 95-55430. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 8, 1996. Decided Sept. 16, 1996. Before: REINHARDT, HALL, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Plaintiff-appellant Daewoo Corporation, a Korean corporation, appeals from a district court order granting summary judgment in a breach of contract case in favor of defendant-appellee, Lockheed Corporation. We affirm. 3 Daewoo contends that Lockheed breached Amendment 11 of the International Consulting Agreement by failing to pay Daewoo five percent commission on the Orion P3-C sale. We find this argument without merit. As both parties noted, Annex 1 to the P3-C sales contract explicitly states that "[a]ny commission fee which is to be paid to the commission agent by the…