In American Isuzu Motors, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Bd. (1986) 186 Cal. App. 3d 464, 230 Cal. Rptr. 769, the court considered the effect of a merger clause in the parties' written contract on a requirement specified in the parties' prior letter of intent. The letter of intent required a separate showroom as part of the dealership facilities, while the subsequent contract did not "contain any express requirement for an exclusive Isuzu showroom." ( Id. at p. 475.) The court held that, "in the absence of any express incorporation of the exclusive showroom requirement in the dealership agreement, the merger clause undercuts any force the earlier showroom requirement could possibly have . . . ." (Ibid.)