$[$Cookware Crisis$]$ Aranda owns Aranda's Cooking, a cooking supply company which sells high quality cookware to restaurants and specialty stores. Aranda stopped at a potential customer, Rita's Restaurant, to show Rita a new, elite line of copper cookware, bakeware, and utensils. Rita told Aranda she wanted to buy the entire cookware line for the stated price of $$5,000,$ but needed time to think about the other items. The following day, Rita called Aranda and told her to add the line of bakeware Rita had quoted for $$5,000$ and the line of utensils. The next week, Aranda delivered the entire cookware line, and said she would return the next day to drop off the bakeware and utensils and pick up a check for $$12,000$ which included $$5,000$ for the bakeware and $$2,000$ for the utensils. Rita was outraged at the price of the utensils and told Aranda not to deliver the utensils because there was no agreement about them. Aranda tells Rita that she agreed to buy the utensils and there is a valid contract, and that she expects full payment when she returns the next day. Rita responds that the addition of the utensils was only a counteroffer, which was not accepted by Rita and there is nothing in writing, and therefore there is no contract. Aranda delivers the bakeware and utensils the following day.

Is Rita correct that her statement to add the utensils did not constitute acceptance?

No$,$ because additional terms must be in writing.

Yes because additional terms are always permitted in sales contracts under the UCC.

No$,$ because Aranda never accepted Rita's counteroffer:

No$,$ because Rita's acceptance was not the mirror image of Aranda's offer.

Yes, because Rita did not expressly condition her acceptance upon Aranda's assent to the additional terms.