National Computing Corporation (NCC) was engaged in the business of buying and selling computer output microfilming equipment. Chase Manhattan Bank orally agreed to sell some of its used computer output microfilming equipment to NCC for $100,000. When Chase subsequently sold the equipment to a third party, NCC filed suit alleging breach of contract. Chase requested dismissal of NCC's complaint on the basis of the Statute of Frauds, alleging that the purported contract in question was for the sale of goods, it was over $500 and there was no writing as required by the UCC. NCC opposed dismissal claiming the contract was covered by the "merchant exception" to the Statute of Frauds. In presenting its case, NCC noted that Chase sold $6.5 million worth of used computer output microfilming equipment from 2017-2019, and that Chase had established policies and procedures for the sale of its surplus assets. Chase's response was that it never purchased the computer output microfilming equipment for resale and that Chase has no specialized knowledge concerning the goods which it buys for its own use. Further, Chase had no familiarity with the market for the equipment which it purchased, and that when it disposed of surplus goods, it generally sold them to resellers, rather than end users, and usually sold the equipment for less than fair market value.

Required:
Was Chase a merchant for purpose of this transaction? Explain why or why not?