In $2019,$ the North Carolina Supreme Court decides a case called Smith v$.$

Jones. Smith v$.$ Jones holds that any adhesion agreement that burdens any

person$$s right to appellate review is substantively unconscionable.

In $2020,$ Anita begins a new cell phone wireless contract with Verizon. $\%$e

agreement she signs provides that, in exchange for $$50$ per months for $24$

months, Verizon will provide her with unlimited calls, texts, and data; the

agreement makes no mention of data speed thro$)$ling$.\%$e agreement also

includes this provision:

Any dispute arising under or related to this Agreement shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the arbitration rules of the

American Arbitration Association. $!$e results of such arbitration

shall be binding, "nal, and not subject to any further review, judicial or otherwise.

A$*$er six months, Anita becomes convinced that Verizon is thro$)$ling her

data speed. She $+$les a lawsuit in North Carolina district court against Verizon, alleging breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation, and unfair

and deceptive trade practices. Verizon responds with a motion to compel

arbitration.

You$$re the district judge in this case. Verizon$$s motion is ripe for adjudication. Which way do you rule? Explain why. If you need more information,

say so and explain how that information would in$,$uence your analysis.