Steven Sanchez worked as a warehouse employee for Gruma Corporation. In December $2016,$ Sanchez was presented an arbitration agreement during a meeting with George Tate, the human resources manager for Gruma. According to Sanchez, Tate told him and other workers to sign the agreement and that "who$-$ever did not sign $[$the agreement$]$ could not have a job." Sanchez alleges that he was not told that he could opt out of the agreement and that he would have done so if he knew. Sanchez further alleges that he was pressured to sign the agreement on the spot without time to read it$,$ which is a claim that Tate disputed. Sanchez was later fired from Gruma in August $2017.$ Following his termination, Sanchez filed suit against Gruma, alleging claims of unpaid wages, disability discrimination, and wrongful termination, among other claims. Gruma sought to compel arbitra$-$tion. Sanchez claimed that Gruma was barred from compelling arbitration because the arbitration agreement was unconscionable. What are the two types of unconscionability a court considers when reviewing an allegedly unconscionable contract? Do you think the court agreed with Sanchez that the agreement was unconscionable?