This decision affirms an order denying an employer’s motion to compel arbitration.  Though it found only a minimal degree of procedural unconscionability in that the arbitration agreement was an adhesion contract, it holds that there was a high degree of unconscionability inherent in the arbitration agreement’s (a) too restrictive limitation of discovery and (b) non-mutuality.  Discovery was limited to two depositions (with no mention of written discovery or document production) with added discovery on a showing of “sufficient cause” which is more than mere need.  Plaintiff filed a age and sex discrimination suit targeting conduct over many years in front of many witnesses, making the two deposition limit wholly inadequate.  Also, the employer exempted from the arbitration clause any suit under its employee confidentiality agreement, a claim that only it could bring, and the employer offered no business justification for the exception and later removed it from its standard arbitration agreement.  Since there were two substantively unconscionable provisions, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to sever them.