section 554.2207(1). See Iowa Code § 554.2207(1); Sudenga Indus., Inc., 894 F.Supp. at 1238 n. 3 (noting that courts have consistently found that invoices, sent contemporaneously with goods can qualify as written confirmations under U.C.C. section 2-207). In addition, the court finds that it is appropriate to supplement the parties’ agreement with course of dealing evidence. See Iowa Code § 554.2202(1). The Terms and Conditions provided o 2011 invoice and the Terms and Conditions printed on the back are part of the contract. b. Are oral promises part of the contract? i. Parties’ arguments CDW argues that oral promises are not part of the contract because “the plain language of the contract excluded extrinsic and parol terms.” CDW Motion at 2. BVS argues that the te . 281, 284 (1931) (<HOLDING>). The “key question,” however, is the intent of
holding that such statements were not even enough for an evidentiary hearing holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous holding that the juveniles statements to police were properly admitted into evidence where the totality of the circumstances showed that the juveniles statements were voluntary holding that statements made in the course of negotiation were not contracts and such statements were merged into the final written agreement holding that when the courts oral statements in the plea colloquy conflict with the written agreement the courts oral statements control