26.  Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of himself and all others  similarly situated, under Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(1)-23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of  Civil Procedure, for Defendant’s violations of the TCPA and FDCPA.   27.  Plaintiff seeks to represent a class of thousands of individuals (“the  TCPA Class”) defined as follows:  All persons in the United States, from four years prior to the filing of the  instant Complaint through the date of the filing of the instant Complaint, to whom  9  Defendant used an automatic telephone dialing system to send an identical or  substantially similar text message to that received by Plaintiff.   28.  Plaintiff seeks to represent a class of thousands of individuals (“the  FDCPA Class”) defined as follows:  All persons in the United States, from one year prior to the filing of the  instant Complaint through the date of the filing of the instant Complaint, to whom  Defendant has sent an identical or substantially similar message to that received by  Plaintiff and to whom Defendant did not send a notice telling them they could  dispute the debt and the steps to dispute the debt.   29.  Numerosity: The Classes are so numerous that joinder of all  individual members in one action would be impracticable. The disposition of the  individual claims of the Classes’ members through this class action will benefit  both the parties and this Court.    30.  Upon information and belief each of the Classes contains thousands of  members at a minimum.   31.  Upon information and belief, the Classes’ size and the identities of the  individual members thereof are ascertainable through Defendant’s records,  including, but not limited to Defendant’s call records.   32.   Members of the Classes may be notified of the pendency of this  action by techniques and forms commonly used in the class actions, such as by  10  published notice, e-mail notice, website notice, fax notice, first class mail, or  combinations thereof, or by other methods suitable to the Classes and deemed  necessary and/or appropriate by the Court.    33.  Typicality:  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members  of the Classes.  The claims of the Plaintiff and members of the Class are based on  the same legal theories and arise from the same unlawful conduct.   34.  Upon information and belief, Defendant, using an automatic telephone  dialing system within the meaning of the TCPA, made, initiated and/or caused to  be initiated at least one text message, identical or substantially similar to the text  messages described above that Defendant sent to Plaintiff, to each member of the  TCPA Class, without obtaining the Plaintiff’s and each member of the Classes’  prior express consent.   35.  Upon informaiton and belief, Defendant, made, initiated and/or  caused to be initiated at least one text message, identical or substantially similar to  the text messages described above that Defendant sent to Plaintiff, to each member  of the FDCPA Class and Defendant did not send Plaintiff or any member of the  FDCPA class a notice telling them they could dispute the debt and the steps to  dispute the debt.  11   36.  Common Questions of Fact and Law:  There is a well-defined  community of common questions of fact and law affecting the Plaintiff and  members of the Classes.     37.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and the TCPA  Class predominate over questions which may affect individual members and  include the following:  a. Whether Defendant’s conduct of using an automatic telephone dialing  system within the meaning of the TCPA, to make, initiate or cause to  be initiated at least one text message to Plaintiff and each member of  the TCPA Class, without obtaining their prior express consent,  violated the TCPA?  b. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the TCPA Class are entitled to  statutory damages from Defendant under the TCPA?  c. Whether Defendant’s violations of the TCPA were willful or  knowing?  d. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the TCPA Class are entitled to  up to triple statutory damages under the TCPA from Defendant for  Defendant’s willful and knowing violations of the TCPA?  12  e. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the TCPA Class are entitled to a  permanent injunction under the TCPA enjoining Defendant from  continuing to engage in its unlawful conduct?    38.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and the FDCPA  Class predominate over questions which may affect individual members and  include the following:  a. Whether Defendant’s conduct of making an initial communication of  sending a text message in an attempt to collect a debt without sending  the requisite notices under 15 U.S.C. 1692g within five days thereafter  violated the FDCPA?  b. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the FDCPA Class are entitled to  statutory damages from Defendant under the FDCPA?  c. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the FDCPA Class are entitled to  actual damages from Defendant under the FDCPA?  d. Whether Plaintiff and the members of the FDCPA Class are entitled to  costs of litigation including a reasonable attorney fee pursuant to 15  U.S.C. §1692k(a)(3)?   39.  Adequacy of Representation:  Plaintiff is an adequate representative  of the Classes because Plaintiff’s interests do not conflict with the interests of the  members of the Classes. Plaintiff will fairly, adequately and vigorously represent  13  and protect the interests of the members of the Classes and has no interests  antagonistic to the members of the Classes.  Plaintiff has retained counsel who are  competent and experienced in litigation in the federal courts, class action litigation,  and TCPA and FDCPA litigation.   40.   Superiority:  A class action is superior to other available means for  the fair and efficient adjudication of the claims of the Classes. While the aggregate  damages that may be awarded to the members of the Classes are likely to be  substantial, the damages awarded to individual members of the Classes are  relatively small. As a result, the expense and burden of individual litigation makes  it economically infeasible and procedurally impracticable for each member of the  Classes to individually seek redress for the wrongs done to them.  Plaintiff does not  know of any other litigation concerning this controversy already commenced  against Defendant by any member of the Classes.  The likelihood of the individual  members of the Classes prosecuting separate claims is remote.  Individualized  litigation would also present the potential for varying, inconsistent, or  contradictory judgments, and would increase the delay and expense to all parties  and the court system resulting from multiple trials of the same factual issues.  In  contrast, the conduct of this matter as a class action presents fewer management  difficulties, conserves the resources of the parties and the court system, and would  protect the rights of each member of the Classes.  Plaintiff knows of no difficulty  14  to be encountered in the management of this action that would preclude its  maintenance as a class action.   41.   Injunctive Relief:  Defendant has acted on grounds generally  applicable to Plaintiff and members of the Class, thereby making appropriate final  injunctive relief with respect to Plaintiff and the members of the Class.  42.  Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in all of the  above paragraphs and incorporates such allegations by reference.   43.  By Defendant’s above-described conduct, Defendant committed  thousands of violations of the TCPA against Plaintiff and the members of the  TCPA Class.   44.  Accordingly, Plaintiff and the members of the TCPA Class are  entitled to statutory damages from Defendant under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) of  greater than $5,000,000 and an injunction against Defendant ordering it to cease its  violations of the TCPA.   45.  If it is found that Defendant willfully and/or knowingly violated the  TCPA, Plaintiff and the members of the TCPA Class request an increase by the  Court of the damage award against Defendant, described in the preceding  paragraph, to three times the amount available under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B), as  15  authorized by 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) for willful or knowing violations, which  amounts to greater than $15,000,000.  46.  The unsolicited text messages Defendant sent to Plaintiff and the  FDCPA Class were an “initial communications” from Defendant in connection with  collection of alleged debts.    47.  Defendant failed to send Plaintiff and the FDCPA Class a written notice  of their rights within five days after the “initial communication”, as is required by  15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a).   48.  Any procedures maintained (i.e., actually employed or implemented)  by Defendant to avoid errors under the FDCPA failed to provide the required  disclosures.   49.  Defendant violated the FDCPA by not advising Plaintiff and the  FDCPA Class of their rights pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a) in Defendant’s initial  communications or within five days of the initial communications.   50.  Accordingly, Defendant committed thousands of violations of 15  U.S.C. § 1692g.   51.  Plaintiff and the FDCPA Class seek damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C.  §1692k and their costs of litigation including, but not limited to a reasonable  attorney fees and costs pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1692k(a)(3).   16 