&_Arvairik, Fulton County Superior Court ***EFILED*'"IVV Date: 4/13/2017 9:10:15 AM X Cathelene Robinson, Clerk tlher -Tyier on  -)(11-1- Off' [•,ve am," Lmoirvl,c-; DWaYli./  Plaintiff VS. 1-,_Yr(1 I  (d/b/ 4  ' 4'v-ectt "3. alper Fred -J -py) youtt.i) t and_ 'Opf.J..S  136 PRYOR STREET, ROOM C-103, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 SUMMONS M ani 6 \no 110,(6 , SoLcho,  d lcconfo and Wa-trer -1\ner, cn hOW  -thenitsolvos  lat[ 04as 90001 ',•-tioidd Plaintiff, vs. FreCtinlOrtS OP icy nP,cee Tfinr.  /1,16), Fr-ec-Ps , ed‘' SaR9-1 ' hay  frnet6,1); arid DeRs  tto, ncluslve  Defendant 16.  Plaintiffs bring this Class action on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23.  17.  The Class which Plaintiffs seek to represent is defined as: All consumers to whom Defendants, within two years from the date of filing this action, provided an electronically printed receipt at the point of a sale or transaction at any of Defendants' physical store locations in the United States, on which receipt Defendants printed more than the last 5 digits of the consumer's debit card (the "Class").'  19.  Numerosity: The Class is so numerous that joinder of all individual members in one action would be impracticable. The disposition of their claims through this Class action will benefit both the parties and this Court.  20.  Plaintiffs believe and thereon allege that there are, at a minimum, thousands (i.e., two thousand or more) of members that comprise the Class.  21.  The exact size of the Class is ascertainable through Defendants' records, including but not limited to Defendants' sales and transaction records.  22.  Members of the Class may be notified of the pendency of this action by techniques and forms commonly used in Class actions, such as by published notice, e-mail notice, wcbsite notice, and/or first-Class mail, or combinations thereof, or by other methods suitable to this Class and deemed necessary and or appropriate by the Court.  23.  Typicality: Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the entire Class. The claims of Plaintiffs and members of the Class are based on the same legal theories and arise from the same unlawful conduct.  25.  Common Questions of Fact and Law: There are a well-defined community of interest and common questions of fact and law affecting the members of the Class.  26.  The questions of fact and law common to the Class predominate over questions which may affect individual members and include the following: (a)  Whether Defendants' conduct of providing Plaintiffs and the Class with sales or transaction receipts whereon Defendants printed more than the last 5 digits of the card violated the FACTA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq.; (b)  Whether Defendants' conduct was willful; and (c) Whether Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to statutory damages, punitive damages, costs, and or attorney fees for Defendants' acts and conduct.  28.  Consistency Of Adjudications: A class action would promote the consistency of adjudicating the rights of Class members. In contrast, the prosecution of separate actions by or against individual members of the Class would create a risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class which would establish incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants.  30.  Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference the allegations contained in this Complaint.  31.  Plaintiffs assert this claim on behalf of themselves and the Class against Defendants.  33. By its express terms, 15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g)(1) applies to "any cash register or other machine or device that electronically prints receipts for credit card or debit card transactions" after December 3, 2006. 15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g)(3).  34.  Defendants transact business in the United States and accept credit cards and debit cards in the course of transacting business with persons such as Plaintiffs and members of the Class. In transacting such business, Defendants use cash registers and or other machines or devices that electronically print receipts for credit card and debit card transactions.  35.  After December 3, 2006, and within two years from the date of filing this action, Defendants, at the point of a sale or transaction with Plaintiff Melanie Wallace, provided Plaintiff Melanie Wallace with one or more electronically printed receipts on each of which Defendants printed more than the last 5 digits of her debit card number. More specifically, Defendants printed the first 6 digits and the last 4 digits of Plaintiff Melanie Wallace's debit card number on her customer receipt(s).  37.  After December 3, 2006, and within two years from the date of filing this action, Defendants, at the point of a sale or transaction with Plaintiff Heather Tyler, provided Plaintiff Heather Tyler with one or more electronically printed receipts on each of which Defendants printed more than the last 5 digits of her debit card number. More specifically, Defendants printed the first 6 digits and the last 4 digits of Plaintiff Heather Tyler's debit card number on her customer receipt(s).  38.  After December 3, 2006, and within two years from the date of filing this action, Defendants, at the point of a sale or transaction with members of the Class, provided each member of the Class with one or more electronically printed receipts on each of which Defendants printed, for each respective Class member, more than the last 5 digits of their debit card number.  39. As set forth above, FACTA was enacted in 2003 and gave merchants who accept credit and or debit cards up to December 4, 2006 to comply with its requirements.  4.  Nor is Defendants' willful violation of FACTA a trifling matter. In the statement provided during his signing of FACTA in 2003, the President underscored the importance of the legislation in combating rampant identity theft: This bill also confronts the problem of identity theft. A growing number of Americans are victimized by criminals who assume their identities and cause havoc in their financial affairs.  With this legislation, the Federal Government is protecting our citizens by taking the offensive against identity theft.  41.  For example, but without limitation, several years ago, VISA, MasterCard, the PCI Security Standards Council (a consortium founded by VISA, MasterCard, Discover, American Express and JCB), companies that sell cash register and other devices for the processing of credit or debit card payments, companies that sell software to operate payment card devices, companies that maintain and repair hardware or software used to process payment card transactions, and other entities informed Defendants about FACTA, including its specific requirements concerning the truncation of credit and debit card numbers and prohibition on the printing of expiration dates, and Defendants' need to comply with same.  42.  Other entities, including but not limited to Defendants' payment card processor (also known as the acquirer, merchant bank, or acquiring bank) which processes credit and debit card payments for transactions occurring at Defendants' stores, likewise informed Defendants about FACTA, including its specific requirements concerning the truncation of credit and debit card numbers and prohibition on the printing of expiration dates, and Defendants' need to comply with same.  45.  Moreover, the Government, through the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"), provided notice of FACTA's requirements to businesses on no less than three separate occasions in 2007, reminding them of the requirement to truncate credit and debit card information on receipts. Defendants were informed of and knew about these notices from the FTC. In one such notice, entitled "FTC Business Alert" "Slip Showing? Federal Law Requires All Businesses to Truncate Credit Card Information on Receipts," and dated May 2007, the FTC reminded businesses, among other things, of the following: What's on the credit and debit card receipts you give your customers? The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the nation's consumer protection agency, says it's time for companies to check their receipts and make sure they're complying with a law that's been in effect for all businesses since December 1, 2006. According to the federal Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA), the electronically printed credit and debit card receipts you give your customers must shorten — or truncate   the account information. You may include no more than the last five digits of the card number, and you must delete the card's expiration date. For example, a receipt that truncates the credit card number and deletes the expiration date could look like this: 5.  Courts have likewise emphasized the purpose of FACTA. For example, the Ninth Circuit recently emphasized that Thin fashioning FACTA, Congress aimed to 'restrict the amount of information available to identity thieves.'" Bateman v. American Multi-Cinema, Inc., 623 F.3d 708, 718 (9t11 Cir. 2010) (quoting 149 Cong. Rec. 26,891 (2003) (statement of Sen. Shelby)).  51.  Defendants have also harmed Plaintiffs and the Class by exposing them to at least an increased risk of identity theft and debit card fraud.  52.  As a result of Defendants' willful violations of FACTA, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs and each member of the Class in the statutory damage amount of "not less than $100 and not more than $1,000" for each violation. 15 U.S.C. § 1681n. 6.  Similarly, the Seventh Circuit recently explained that "[i]dentity theft is a serious problem, and FACTA is a serious congressional effort to combat it." Redman v. Radioshack Corp., 768 F.3d 622, 639 (7th Cir. 2014).  For Violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq. (On Behalf of Plaintiffs and the Class as against Defendants)  STATE OF GEORGIA MELANIE WALLACE, SASCHA FELICIANO and HEATHER TYLER, on  )) behalf of themselves and all others similarly ) situated,  ) Plaintiffs, v. cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number . . . upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction." 15 U.S.C. § 1681c(g)(1) (emphasis added). 