Barnett

MEMORANDUM ***

Cigna Healthcare of Arizona (“Cigna”) 1 appeals the district court’s order denying its motion to compel arbitration of an employment dispute brought by Dr. Francis J. Barnett. Because the facts are known to the parties, we do not recite them here. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1). 2 We affirm the district court.

The district court properly denied Cigna’s motion because the arbitration provisions contained in Cigna’s employee handbook were never incorporated into the employment contract between Cigna and Dr. Barnett. The contract provided that the parties’ agreement “may not be modified or amended other than by an agree *567 ment in 'writing signed by the parties.” Thus, Cigna contracted away any power it may have had to unilaterally alter its employment agreement with Dr. Barnett. 3 Dr. Barnett’s acknowledgment that he received and reviewed the handbook does not constitute “an agreement in writing signed by the parties” sufficient to modify the contract. 4 Cigna points to no evidence in the record of a writing, signed by Dr. Barnett and Cigna, in which Dr. Barnett accepts the arbitration provisions proposed in the employee handbook. 5 Because…