[brief] No one at Respondent  [...] advised Appellant to review the documents with an attorney or that she should ask questions about any of the policies in terms of the potential impact on her legal rights.  See id.  Even after Appellant was placed at her worksite at Respondent [...], she was never provided with a copy of any of the documents she allegedly acknowledged when she clicked through the employee portal.  See id.  Furthermore, Appellant did not “sign” any of these statements of company policy, nor did she even type her name into the screen.  See id.  Appellant did not do anything more than log into the portal and click through the various policy screens that appeared.  See id.  Additionally, Appellant could not have voluntarily entered into the Arbitration Agreement because she certified that she did not even know what arbitration meant until after Respondents filed their respective motions to compel arbitration.  See id.  Appellant was never provided with a copy of the Arbitration Agreement after she allegedly acknowledged same, or at any point thereafter, during her employment with Respondents [...] and [...].  See id.  However, even reading the Arbitration Agreement after the fact, Appellant has certified that she does not understand the differences between filing an arbitration claim against Respondents and filing a lawsuit in New Jersey Superior Court.  See id.  Had Appellant known she was waiving her right to a jury trial simply by opening up the policies located on the employee portal, she would not have opened up the alleged Arbitration Agreement or, at the very least, would have asked for a physical copy to review with an attorney before “agreeing” to anything.  See id.  Further complicating the matter is the fact the alleged Arbitration Agreement is by and between Appellant and Respondent [...] – not Respondent [...].  See id.  Despite Appellant and Respondent [...] being the parties to any Arbitration Agreement, Appellant worked exclusively with employees of Respondent [...] throughout her employment.  See id.  Appellant’s supervisor during her employment was an employee of Respondent [...] and, aside from the Arbitration Agreement allegedly being by and between Appellant and Respondent [...], Respondent [...] played no role in the day-to-day of her employment.  See id.  Appellant was specifically instructed to raise any questions or concerns about her position to employees of Respondent [...] and, further, it was Respondent [...] who allegedly decided to terminate Appellant’s employment.  See id.  After Appellant completed the employee onboarding procedure with Respondent [...], she had hardly any interaction with any employees of Respondent [...].  See id.  Additionally, Respondent [...] never required Appellant to acknowledge policies or procedures even though all of her job duties—including the physical location she would need to be in to complete her job—were dictated and assigned by Respondent [...].  See id.  Accordingly, Appellant never agreed to arbitrate any claims of discrimination and retaliation which accrued throughout her employment with Respondents, and if she did allegedly enter into the Arbitration Agreement at issue, Appellant certainly did not do so knowingly and voluntarily.  IV.