1. Whether, within the four years prior to the filing of the Complaint, Defendant  made any call/s (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with  the prior express consent of the called party) to Class members using any  automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice to any  telephone number assigned to a cellular telephone service;   11.  Sometime prior to January 7th, 2015, Plaintiffs were assigned, and became the  owners of, a cellular telephone number from her wireless provider.     12.  Beginning on or about January 7, 2015, Plaintiffs received numerous telephone  calls on their cellular telephone from Defendant where Defendant used an automatic telephone  dialing system (“ATDS”) as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1), which is prohibited by 47 U.S.C.  § 227(b)(1)(A). This conduct continued daily for several days.    13.  The ATDS used by Defendant has the capacity to store or produce telephone  numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator.   14.  The calls to the Plaintiffs from Defendant came from phone numbers including  but not limited to 856-202-7301.   16.  Plaintiffs did not provide “prior express consent” to receive telephone calls from  Defendant using an artificial or prerecorded voice utilizing an ATDS, as required by 47 U.S.C.  § 227(b)(1)(A).   17.  These telephone calls by Defendant or its agents were therefore in violation of 47  U.S.C. § 227(b)(1).  18.  Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others  similarly situated (“the Class”).   19.  Plaintiffs represent, and are members of, the Class, consisting of:   All persons within the United States who received any telephone  call/s from Defendant or their agent/s and/or employee/s to said  person’s cellular telephone made through the use of any automatic  telephone dialing system or with an artificial or prerecorded voice  within the four years prior to the filing of the Complaint.   2. Whether Plaintiffs and the Class members were damaged thereby, and the  extent of damages for such violation; and    20.  Defendant and its employees or agents are excluded from the Class.  Plaintiffs do  not know the number of members in the Class, but believe the Class members number in the tens  of thousands, if not more.  Thus, this matter should be certified as a Class action to assist in the  expeditious litigation of this matter.   21.  Plaintiffs and members of the Class were harmed by the acts of Defendant in at  least the following ways: Defendant illegally contacted Plaintiffs and the Class members via  their cellular telephones thereby causing Plaintiffs and the Class members to incur certain  cellular telephone charges or reduce cellular telephone time for which Plaintiffs and the Class  members previously paid, by having to retrieve or administer messages left by Defendant during  those illegal calls, and invading the privacy of said Plaintiffs and the Class members.  Plaintiffs  and the Class members were damaged thereby.   23.  The joinder of the Class members is impractical and the disposition of their  claims in the Class action will provide substantial benefits both to the parties and to the Court.   The Class can be identified through Defendant’s records or Defendant’s agent’s records.   24.  There is a well-defined community of interest in the questions of law and fact  involved affecting the parties to be represented.  The questions of law and fact to the Class  predominate over questions which may affect individual Class members, including the  following:   25.  As persons who received numerous calls using an automatic telephone dialing  system or an artificial or prerecorded voice, without Plaintiffs’ prior express consent, Plaintiffs  are asserting claims that are typical of the Class.  Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent  and protect the interests of the Class in that Plaintiffs have no interest antagonistic to any  member of the Class.     27.  Plaintiffs have retained counsel experienced in handling class action claims and  claims involving violations of the TCPA.   28.  A class action is a superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this  controversy.  Class-wide damages are essential to induce Defendant to comply with federal and  California law.  The interest of Class members in individually controlling the prosecution of  separate claims against Defendant is small because the maximum statutory damages in an  individual action for violation of privacy are minimal.  Management of these claims is likely to  present significantly fewer difficulties than those presented in many class claims.   29.  Defendant has acted on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby making  appropriate final injunctive relief and corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the Class  as a whole.  3. Whether Defendant should be enjoined from engaging in such conduct in the  future.    30.  Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint  as though fully stated herein.   31.  The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitute numerous and multiple  negligent violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each and every one of the above- cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.   33.  Plaintiffs and the Class are also entitled to and seek injunctive relief prohibiting  such conduct in the future.  34.  Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint  as though fully stated herein.   35.  The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitute numerous and multiple  knowing and/or willful violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each and every one  of the above-cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.   36.  As a result of Defendant’s knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et  seq., Plaintiff and each of the Class are entitled to treble damages, as provided by statute, up to  $1,500.00 for each and every violation, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B) and 47 U.S.C.  § 227(b)(3)(C).    37.  Plaintiffs and the Class are also entitled to and seek injunctive relief prohibiting  such conduct in the future.  KNOWING AND/OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT  47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   NEGLIGENT VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT  47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.  