Florida-based Topp Paper Company, LLC (plaintiff) bought a label-printing machine for over $1 million from Canadian company ETI Converting Equipment (defendant). The contract contained a limited 12-month repair-or-replacement warranty, and a choice-of-law clause selecting the laws of Quebec, Canada, as governing. The machine kept malfunctioning, and Topp requested a refund 21 months after its installation. ETI refused the machine’s return and replaced its coating head, making it run substantially better. But Topp claimed that problems with high-speed labels sticking in the machine continued. Ultimately, Topp claimed that the machine stopped working completely and sued for a refund. ETI argued that it had fixed the problems, and a Topp employee said Topp continued using the machine eight hours a day. Topp countered it could not use the machine to make fast application labels for high-volume industries like food, produce, and packaging, undercutting its profits. ETI requested summary judgment finding that it had not fundamentally breached the contract.