1097, 1104 (9th Cir.2003) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b) and stating that in “all averments of fraud ..., the circumstances constituting fraud ... shall be stated with particularity”) (emphasis omitted). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Rent IT’s claim for fraudulent misrepresentation. IV. Declaratory relief We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of The Home Depot on Rent IT’s claim for declaratory relief because Rent IT abandoned this claim by not discussing it in the opening brief. See Don v. Gonzales, 476 F.3d 738, 739-40 n. 2 (9th Cir.2007). V. Damages Georgia law allows a party to recover for lost profits in a breach of contract action. See Morehouse College, Inc. v. McGaha, 277 Ga.App. 529, 627 S.E.2d 39, 42-43 (2005) (<HOLDING>). Viewing the evidence in the light most
holding that party may not recover damages for breach of contract where its own bad faith caused the other partys breach holding that a cause of action for breach of contract accrues at the time of the breach holding party in breach could not maintain suit for breach of contract holding the government liable to plaintiffs for breach of contract holding that when an expelled student sued for breach of contract based on a schools failure to follow procedures in its student handbook the student could recover for lost income during the extra time necessary for the student to complete his degree