The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review a California state rule that arbitration clauses with more than one unconscionable provision cannot be saved by a severability clause.  MHN Gov’t Services, Inc. v. Zaborowski, 601 F. App’x 461 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. granted, 136 S. Ct. 27 (U.S. Oct. 1, 2015) (No. 14-1458) (Mem.).  In the ruling below, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of a motion to compel arbitration on grounds that the arbitration provision contained multiple unconscionable terms.  The Ninth Circuit concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to sever the unconscionable portions of the arbitration clause because multiple provisions of the arbitration clause permeated the entire agreement with unconscionability.   The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address whether California’s arbitration-only severability rule is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act.   The petitioner contends that, by applying the non-severability rule only to arbitration clauses, arbitration clauses are treated less favorably than other contracts and the rule thereby violates the strong federal policy in favor of arbitration.