25.  On or about August 8, 2018, Defendant called Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number  ending in 6305 (“6305 Number”) with a prerecorded message.    26.  Upon Plaintiff answering the phone, a prerecorded message stated the following: “this  is an important message from Mr. Cooper, your home loan company, please call us at your earliest  convenience, our toll-free number is 1-866-316-2432. Thank You.”  Plaintiff recognized the message  as a prerecorded voice, and could tell that it was not a live voice.     27.  The prerecorded message constitutes marketing because it asks Plaintiff to call  Defendant for the ultimate purpose of purchasing a home loan. Defendant’s core business consists of  providing home loans to consumers and Defendant makes a profit from writing those home loans.   28.  Plaintiff is the subscriber and sole user of the 6305 Number.   29.  Plaintiff is not a mortgagor of Defendant and Defendant is not Plaintiff’s mortgagee.   30.  Defendant called Plaintiff from 866-316-2432, a number owned and/or operated by  Defendant.    31.  Plaintiff received the subject call within this judicial district and, therefore, Defendant’s  violation of the TCPA occurred within this district.     33.  At no point in time did Plaintiff provide Defendant with his express consent to be  contacted using a prerecorded message.     34.  The internet is replete with complaints regarding Defendant’s use of prerecorded  messages to contact consumers including the following:  2 3  4  5   35.  Defendant’s unsolicited calls caused Plaintiff actual harm, including invasion of his  privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion.  Defendant’s calls  also inconvenienced Plaintiff and caused disruption to his daily life.    37.  Plaintiff brings this case on behalf of the below defined Class:  All persons within the United States who, within the four years  prior to the filing of this Complaint; were sent a prerecorded call;  from Defendant or anyone on Defendant’s behalf; to said person’s  cellular telephone number.     38.  Defendant and their employees or agents are excluded from the Class. Plaintiff does not  know the number of members in the Class but believes the Class members number in the several  thousands, if not more.  42.  The common questions in this case are capable of having common answers. If Plaintiff’s  claim that Defendant routinely calls telephone numbers assigned to cellular telephone services is  accurate, Plaintiff and the Class members will have identical claims capable of being efficiently  adjudicated and administered in this case.  47.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth  herein.    48.  It is a violation of the TCPA to make “any call (other than a call made for  emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any  automatic telephone dialing system or prerecorded or artificial voice… to any telephone number  assigned to a … cellular telephone service ….” 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii).    49.  Defendant – or third parties directed by Defendant – used pre-recorded calls to  make non-emergency telephone calls to the cellular telephones of Plaintiff and other members of  the Class.   50.  These calls were made without regard to whether Defendant had first obtained  express permission from the called party to make such calls. In fact, Defendant did not have prior  express consent to call the cell phones of Plaintiff and the other members of the putative Class  when its calls were made.    52.  As a result of Defendant’s conduct and pursuant to § 227(b)(3) of the TCPA,  Plaintiff and the other members of the putative Class were harmed and are each entitled to a  minimum of $500.00 in damages for each violation. Plaintiff and the class are also entitled to an  injunction against future calls.   WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Cody Becker, on behalf of himself and the other members of the  Class, prays for the following relief:   a.  A declaration that Defendant’s practices described herein violate the Telephone  Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227;   b.  A declaration that Defendant’s violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection  Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227, were willful and knowing;  c.  An injunction prohibiting Defendant from using pre-recorded messages to call  telephone numbers assigned to cellular telephones without the prior express consent of the called  party;   d.  An award of actual, statutory damages, and/or trebled statutory damages; and   e.  Such further and other relief the Court deems reasonable and just.  PROPOSED CLASS   Violations of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)  (On Behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)  