waiver of the constitutional right to trial by jury. See, e.g., Aetna Ins. Co., 301 U.S. at 393, 57 S.Ct. at ng burden of proof and production on party seeking to avoid enforcement of contractual jury waiver). That is, the mere fact that a contractual jury waiver exists and that the claims are within its scope does not shift the burden to the party opposing enforcement of the contractual jury waiver. Instead, only if the party seeking to enforce the jury waiver provision brings forward at least prima facie evidence that the waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made, rebutting the presumption against jury trial waivers, does the burden shift to the opposing party to establish that the waiver was not made knowingly and voluntarily. In re Gen. Elec. Capital Corp., 203 S.W.3d at 316 (<HOLDING>); RDO Fin. Servs. Co., 191 F.Supp.2d at 813-14
holding that an appeal waiver is valid when it is entered into knowingly and voluntarily recognizing initial burden of presenting prima facie evidence that jury waiver was knowingly and voluntarily made is on party seeking to enforce provision holding prelitigation waiver of jury trial must be made knowingly and voluntarily and courts will indulge in every reasonable presumption against a waiver of that right holding that jury waiver stating that it was made knowingly and voluntarily raised presumption of same and that burden was on party challenging enforceability of jury waiver to present evidence overcoming presumption recognizing that contractual jury waiver provision that was conspicuous  because it was in bolded font and in all capital letters  met burden of party seeking to enforce provision to make prima facie showing that waiver was knowing and voluntary