
    EPIC HOTEL, LLC, etc., Appellant, v. CULLIGAN INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, et al., Appellees.
    No. 3D14-2142.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    March 25, 2015.
    
      Stearns Weaver Miller Weissler Alha-deff & Sitterson, and Eugene E. Stearns, Kelly R. Melchiondo and Maria A. Fehret-dinov, for appellant.
    Sedgwick LLP and Robert C. Weill, Ra-món Abadin and Eric L. Lundt, for appel-lees.
    Before SHEPHERD, C.J., and FERNANDEZ and LOGUE, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Tiara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Marsh & McLennan Co., Inc., 110 So.3d 399, 407 (Fla.2013) (“[T]he economic loss rule applies only in the products liability context.”); Casa Clara Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Charley Toppino & Sons, Inc., 620 So.2d 1244, 1247 (Fla.1993) (“The character of a loss determines the appropriate remedies, and, to determine the character of a loss, one must look to the product purchased by the plaintiff, not the product sold by the defendant.”) (emphasis added); see also, East River S.S. Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval, Inc., 476 U.S. 858, 872, 106 S.Ct. 2295, 90 L.Ed.2d 865 (1986) (“Damage to a product itself ... means simply that the product has not met the customer’s expectations, or, in other words, that the customer has received ‘insufficient product value.’ ”).  