In Treibacher Industrie AG V

In Treibacher Industrie AG v.Allegheny Technology,Treibacher sued Allegheny,under the CISG,for breach of a contract that caused Treibacher to lose money on the sale of a hard metal powder when Allegheny cancelled the contract in favor of a less expensive supplier.The courts held that:

A) the CISG did not cover the contract because metals are not covered by it,which includes powered metals,so Austrian law (where the contract was signed) would govern
B) the CISG did not cover the contract because metals are not covered by it,which includes powered metals;the UCC would govern the contract because it was signed in the U.S.and most transactions took place there
C) the CISG governed and the courts would look to the commercial law of the home countries of the parties involved as the CISG was not clear on the issue at hand
D) the CISG governed and the courts would look to the past dealings of the parties since the written contract was not clear on the issue at hand;Allegheny prevailed
E) none of the other choices