21.  Defendant CFN is a privately held company that offers a range of financial  services and products to small businesses.  Upon information and belief, Defendants strategy for  increasing the volume of its potential customers involves sending uninvited faxes to solicit  business.     23.  Defendants are responsible for sending the above-described Junk Faxes.   24.  The Junk Fax received by Plaintiff encouraged the reader to contact CFN via toll  free phone number 866-767-4447 or through its website at www.cfncash.com.  Upon  information and belief, the telephone number and website are all owned, maintained, and  operated by Defendants.     25.  The Junk Fax received by Plaintiff is marketing material for Defendants,  advertising the commercial availability of Defendants’ goods and services, which include  various cash and loan offers.   26.  Plaintiff has no prior or existing business relationship with Defendants.   27.  Plaintiff did not provide prior express consent to receive Junk Faxes from  Defendants, did not voluntarily agree to make its facsimile number available for public  distribution, and did not invite or give permission to Defendants to use their fax numbers..   28.  Defendants sent the facsimile to Plaintiff and the other putative class members  without obtaining their prior express invitation or permission.   29.  There are no reasonable means for Plaintiff, or any other class member, to avoid  receiving illegal junk faxes such as the ones at issue in this case.  Fax machines are left on and  ready to receive the urgent communications their owners desire to receive.  30.  Plaintiff brings this case as a class action on behalf of a National Class, pursuant  to FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a), 23(b)(2), and/or 23(b)(3), defined as follows:    All persons or entities who (1) on or after four years prior to the  filing of this action, (2) were sent telephone facsimile messages of  material advertising the commercial availability or quality of any  property, goods or services by or on behalf of Defendants.     32.  Excluded from the National Class and New Jersey Class are Defendants, any  entity in which Defendants have a controlling interest or that has a controlling interest in  Defendants, and Defendants’ legal representative, assignees, and successors.  Also excluded are  the judge to whom this case is assigned and any member of the judge’s immediate family.     33.  This action has been brought and may be properly maintained as a class action  pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 23(a) as Plaintiff and the Classes satisfy the numerosity,  commonality, typicality, and adequacy requirements for maintaining a class action.    34.  Numerosity.  Upon information and belief, the number of members in the Class  is so numerous as to render joinder impracticable.  Plaintiff is informed and believe that the  proposed Classes contain hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of members.  Upon information  and belief, the precise size (and identity and contact information) of the Classes can be  readily determined from documents and records maintained by Defendants.   35.  Joinder.  Joinder of all of these individuals is impracticable because of the  large number of Class members and the fact that Class members are likely dispersed over a  large geographical area, with many members located outside of New Jersey.   36.  Typicality.  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of the  Classes.  Plaintiff, like all members of the Classes, received an unsolicited advertisement from  Defendants by way of facsimile transmission.  As a result, Plaintiff and all members of the  Classes were injured due to Defendants’ unlawful and improper conduct.   38.  Adequacy.  Plaintiff has the requisite personal interest in the outcome of this  action and will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Classes.  Plaintiff has no  interests that are adverse to, or in conflict with, the interests of the members of the Classes.   40.  Predominance.  Common questions of law and fact exist as to all members of  the Classes, and predominate over any questions that affect only individual members of the  Classes. These common questions of law and fact include, without limitation, the common  and predominant questions of whether the Plaintiff and the Classes have been injured as a  result of the Defendants’ conduct; whether Plaintiff and members of the Classes are entitled  to damages and/or equitable relief and, if so, the measure and/or nature of this relief.   42.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference each preceding and succeeding paragraph as  though fully set forth at length herein.    43.  Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of itself and on behalf of the  members of the National Class against all Defendants.    44.  The foregoing acts and omission of Defendants and/or their affiliates, agents,  and/or other persons or entities acting on Defendants’ behalf constitute numerous and multiple  violation of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(c), by transmitting Junk Faxes to Plaintiff and the  other members of the National Class without obtaining their consent and without having had an  existing business relationship with them.    45.  As a result of Defendants’ and/or its affiliates, agents and/or other persons or  entities acting on Defendants’ behalf negligent violations of the TCPA, Plaintiff and members  of the National Class are entitled to an award of $500 in statutory damages for each and every  negligent facsimile in violation of the statute, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).   46.  Plaintiff and members of the National Class are also entitled to and do seek  injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants and/or its affiliates, agents, and/or other persons or  entities acting on Defendants’ behalf from violating the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(I)(C), by  sending Junk Faxes in the future.  48.  Plaintiff brings this cause of action on behalf of itself and on behalf of the  members of the National Class against all Defendants.    49.  The foregoing acts and omission of Defendants and/or their affiliates, agents,  and/or other persons or entities acting on Defendants’ behalf constitute numerous and multiple  violation of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(c), by transmitting Junk Faxes to Plaintiff and the  other members of the National Class without obtaining their consent and without having had an  existing business relationship with them.    50.  As a result of Defendants’ and/or its affiliates, agents and/or other persons or  entities acting on Defendants’ behalf knowing and/or willful violations of the TCPA, Plaintiff  and members of the National Class are entitled to an award of $1,500 in statutory damages for  each and every knowing and/or willful facsimile in violation of the statute, pursuant to 47  U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).   51.  Plaintiff and members of the National Class are also entitled to and do seek  injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants and/or its affiliates, agents, and/or other persons or  entities acting on Defendants’ behalf from violating the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(I)(C), by  sending Junk Faxes in the future.  52.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference each preceding and each succeeding  paragraph as though fully set forth herein.   54.  The NJCFA was enacted to protect citizens from deceptive, fraudulent, and  misleading commercial practices and makes such practices unlawful.    55.  The aforementioned unlawful practices by Defendants constitute a violation of  N.J.S.A. § 56:8-158 because Defendants used a telephone facsimile machine to send unsolicited  advertisements to a telephone facsimile machine within the State of New Jersey.    56.  Pursuant to N.J.S.A. § 56:8-159, any person aggrieved by a violation of this act  may bring an action in the Superior Court for damages, either the actual damages sustained or  $500 for each violation, whichever is greater, or to enjoin further violations of this act, together  with costs of suit and reasonable attorney’s fees.   57.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff and New Jersey Class members  have suffered a loss in accordance with the aforementioned statute.   58.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff and New Jersey Class members  have suffered an ascertainable loss in the form of direct monetary losses related to paper, toner,  and other materials Plaintiff and New Jersey Class members were forced to incur as a result of  Defendants’ unsolicited advertisements.  Defendants’ actions also cost Plaintiff and New Jersey  Class members’ time, as their time was wasted receiving, reviewing and routing Defendants’  illegal faxes. Finally, the Junk Faxes sent to Plaintiff and the New Jersey Class violated their  right to privacy.   59.  A causal relationship exists between Defendants’ unlawful, conduct and  Plaintiff’s and the putative Classes’ injuries.  Had Defendants’ not engaged in the  aforementioned illegal conduct, Plaintiff and the New Jersey Class would not have incurred the  injuries and costs associated with the receipt of unsolicited facsimile advertisements.    KNOWING OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE TCPA   NEGLIGENT VIOLATIONS OF THE TCPA   VIOLATION OF THE NEW JERSEY   CONSUMER FRAUD ACT (“NJCFA”)  