This matter presents a novel issue of whether an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provision is enforceable if the party drafting the contract reserves the right to file certain claims in court while the other party does not have that same right. The court holds that the unilateral right to file in court is unenforceable. Plaintiff entered into a written contract with defendant to build an in-ground swimming pool. Defendant prepared a contract, which contained an ADR provision that both parties electronically signed. The court holds the portion of the ADR provision requiring mediation and arbitration of any controversy, dispute, or claim, including statutory claims, is valid and enforceable under Atalese v. U.S. Legal Servs. Grp., L.P., 219 N.J. 430 (2014). However, the court finds the reservation of rights provision contained in the ADR section of the contract, which created an exception to arbitration only for defendant, to pursue a claim for money damages in court if plaintiff failed to pay under the contract while plaintiff was barred from seeking any relief in court, is unconscionable and therefore, unenforceable. However, the court determined the reservation of rights provision was severable and struck it from the contract, which will allow the parties to mediate and arbitrate their disputes.