O P I N I O N Jean Elizabeth Simmons sued Appellants—SK Plymouth, LLC; SK E&P Operations America, LLC (“SKEPOA”); and Joey Jun—for wrongful termination of employment. Based on an arbitration agreement signed by Simmons when she began employment with SKEPOA, Appellants filed a motion to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act.[1] Simmons responded, asserting that the arbitration agreement was not enforceable because SKEPOA had not signed the agreement. The trial court denied Appellants’ motion to compel arbitration. The trial court also denied Appellants’ motion to reconsider the motion to compel. In this interlocutory appeal, Appellants raise two issues. They challenge (1) the trial court’s denial of their motion to compel arbitration and (2) the denial of their motion to reconsider. Because the evidence from the motion to compel proceedings demonstrated that SKEPOA intended to be bound by the arbitration agreement, while no evidence showed that the parties intended for SKEPOA’s signature to be a condition precedent to its enforcement, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to compel arbitration. But we agree with Simmons that, in this interlocutory appeal, we have no jurisdiction to address the trial court’s denial of the motion to reconsider. We reverse the trial court’s order denying Appellants’ motion to compel arbitration and remand to the trial court. We dismiss the portion of the appeal challenging the order denying the motion to reconsider. Background On May 2, 2018, Simmons received, and accepted, a written offer of employment for the position of senior production technician with “SK E&P Company.” The offer informed Simmons that, “[a]s a condition for you to commence your employment with the Company, you are required to sign the Company’s separate Confidentiality and Arbitration Agreement a copy of which is being provided to you along with this offer letter.”[2] Other documents in the record indicate that the senior production technician position accepted by Simmons was with SK Plymouth, not with SK E&P Company. On June 20, 2018, a letter from SKEPOA’s president to Simmons indicated that SKEPOA intended to transfer some of SK Plymouth’s operations to SKEPOA. The letter (hereafter “Transfer Letter”) informed Simmons that her employment with SK Plymouth would be transferred to SKEPOA beginning July 1, 2018. The Transfer Letter also stated, “Except as set out in this letter, there will be no change to your existing terms and conditions of employment.” The Transfer Letter requested Simmons to indicate whether she accepted the new position with SKEPOA by signing the letter. A copy of the Transfer Letter signed by Simmons is not part of the motion-to-compel record, however, other documents in the record indicate that Simmons’s employment transferred to SKEPOA on July 1, 2018. On July 12, 2018, Simmons signed an arbitration agreement, entitled Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Claims (“the Arbitration Agreement”). The agreement provided, in relevant part, as follows: In consideration of the at-will employment relationship and its continuation between SK E&P Operations Americas (the “Company”) and Jean Simmons (“Employee”) and the mutual desire of the parties to enter in this Agreement, the Company and Employee hereby agree that any and all disputes, claims or controversies arising out of or relating to this Agreement, the employment relationship between the parties, or the termination of the employment relationship, that are not resolved by their mutual agreement shall be resolved by final and binding arbitration by a neutral arbitrator. This Agreement includes any claims that the Company may have against Employee, or that Employee may have against the Company or against any of its officers, directors, employees, agents, or parent, subsidiary, or affiliated entities. . . . . The claims covered by this Agreement include, but are not limited to, claims for wrongful termination; . . . discrimination, harassment or retaliation, including but not limited to such conduct based on race, sex, pregnancy, religion, national origin, ancestry, age, . . . or any other protected category; [or] violation of . . . the Texas Labor Code. . . . . The Company reserves its right to amend or modify this Agreement at any time at its sole and absolute discretion provided that it gives Employee thirty (30) days’ written notice. Notwithstanding any provision in this Agreement to the contrary, if the Company provides such notice, the Employee may reject such a change by sending written notice of the rejection to the Employee’s immediate supervisor within 30 days of the issuance of the notice. By rejecting any such change, the Employee will agree that the [a]rbitration agreement in effect with the Employee immediately before the proposed change, if any, will apply to that Employee. The parties agree that there is good and valuable consideration for the execution of the Agreement, including but not limited to, Employee’s continued employment with the Company, the requirement that the agreement to arbitrate all claims is mutual between the parties, and other good and valuable consideration. . . . . UNDER THIS ARBITRATION AGREEMENT THE PARTIES WAIVE THEIR RIGHT TO HAVE ANY DISPUTE, CLAIM OR CONTROVERSY DECIDED BY A JUDGE OR JURY IN A COURT. Simmons’s signature, on the last page of the Arbitration Agreement, appears as follows:
