On June 17, a California appellate court held that a delegation clause, providing that issues relating to the enforcement of the arbitration agreement are to be delegated to the arbitrator for resolution, is not unconscionable.  Malone v. Superior Court, 173 Cal. Rptr. 3d 241 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (No. B253891).  After an employee sued her employer for wage and hour violations, the employer moved to compel arbitration pursuant to a clause in the employee handbook.  The employee opposed the motion, arguing that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable.  The employer responded that the arbitration agreement contained a delegation clause, providing that issues relating to the enforceability of the arbitration agreement were themselves delegated to the arbitrator for resolution.  The dispute thus turned on the issue of whether the delegation clause itself was unconscionable.  The California Supreme Court held that the  delegation clause was not unconscionable: it was not inherently unfair, it was not unilateral, and it did not provide for a biased decision maker.  Further, the clause was clear and unmistakable and was not hidden in fine print.