Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The consent to jurisdiction clause of the plaintiff's invoices constituted an additional term which materially altered the parties' agreement (see, UCC 2-207 U.C.C. [2] [b]; Matter of Marlene Indus. Corp. [Carnac Textiles], 45 N.Y.2d 327; Pacamor Bearings v. Molon Motors Coil, 102 A.D.2d 355, 358). As no other basis is alleged for personal jurisdiction over the defendant, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint ( see, CPLR 3211 [a] [8]).
Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Thompson and Friedmann, JJ., concur.