With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". separate disclaimer document, with its explicit incorporation of section 103, was sufficiently conspicuous and unambiguous under Wyoming law. In determining whether an at-will employment disclaimer is sufficiently conspicuous and unambiguous, Wyoming courts apply a three-part test. See Lincoln, 867 P.2d at 703-05; Sanchez, 855 P.2d at 1259. First, a court must assess capital letters and is the only text appearing on the one-page document. Cf. Lincoln, 867 P.2d at 704 (listing fact that lettering in disclaimer was capitalized as factor enhancing its prominence). Second, given its placement, plaintiff should have noticed the disclaimer; it was presented in a document completely separate from the manual, and plaintiff filled in her name by hand and signed it. Cf. Sanchez, 855 P.2d at 1259 (<HOLDING>). Finally, the text of the disclaimer is

A: holding inconspicuous written disclaimer to be unenforceable absent actual knowledge of the disclaimer
B: holding that disclaimer was not physically conspicuous where it was buried in the introductory paragraphs of an employee handbook
C: holding that an arbitration agreement in an employee handbook was illusory where the employer expressly reserved a right to unilaterally rescind any provisions of the handbook
D: holding that an employee handbook did not constitute a valid unilateral contract between the employee and employer in the absence of adequate independent consideration
B.