Question 1 33 points Save Ans tence In 2008. Renata Corp. (RC) and Bianca Corp. (BC) signed an agreement for "future purchase by RC of OLED screens made by BC to be used in RC computers. The agreement stated that RC was not obligated to buy from BC and that future purchase orders shall be [BC's only authorization to manufacture Items." In March 2009 RC wrote to BC about the possibility of RC purchasing 15,000,000 Screens per two consecutive twelve (12) month periods This quantity is a forecast only, and represents no commitment by RC to purchase these quantities during or after this time period." BC said that it wanted greater assurances in a second lotter, RC reexpressed its "intent to order from BC 30 million OLED screens over a minimum period of two years, contingent on the condition That RC's requirements for these OLED screens continue" BC spent about $26 million on equipment to make the OLED screens. By 2017, the need for OLED screens had dissipated with the advent of new technology and RC told BC that it would no longer buy them BC filed a surt in a federal district court against RC, seeking $85 million in damages. On what basis might the court rule in favor of RC? Explain fully ks and let's