12. On January 17, 2014, Capital Funds transmitted a Junk Fax to Barron’s and to  thousands of other entities throughout the United States (the “Junk Fax”).  A copy of the Junk  Fax is attached as Exhibit 1.     13. At no time did Barron’s give Capital Funds its express prior invitation or permission,  or prior consent in any fashion, for the transmission of the Barron’s Junk Fax.    14. The Barron’s Junk Fax did not contain a Compliant Opt Out Notice.   16. Al Peters was an agent, employee or representative of Capital Funds at the time he  sent the Junk Faxes at issue to Barron’s.  Al Peters acted with actual, implied or apparent  authority from Capital Funds to transmit the Junk Faxes to Barron’s.  At all relevant times, Peters  acted pursuant to Capital Funds’s control and instruction.  In addition to its own direct liability,  Capital Funds is liable for the actions of Al Peters based on the doctrines of vicarious liability,  respondeat superior, agency, authority, ratification and other doctrines.  17. Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  and on behalf of a class of all other persons or entities similarly situated throughout the United  States.   18. Through the transmission of generic facsimile advertisements promoting their  services, Capital Funds has engaged in widespread advertising via unsolicited facsimile  transmission in violation of the TCPA.   19. Based on the generic style of the facsimile advertisement and the standard  telemarketing reach of a Junk Fax campaign, Capital Funds has likely transmitted unsolicited  facsimile advertisements to tens of thousands of recipients throughout the United States.  In fact,  the facsimile advertising campaign of Capital Funds has generated a number of internet  complaints. See http://800notes.com/Phone.aspx/1-866-767-4447 (Last visited May 27, 2014).   20. Capital Funds did not obtain the consent of facsimile recipients prior to the  transmission of facsimile advertisements.      22. To the extent facsimile advertisements were transmitted by Capital Funds to  consumers who had given consent, or had an established business relationship with Capital  Funds, of which there is no evidence at this time, the facsimile advertisements are still in  violation of the TCPA as they did not contain the Compliant Opt Out Notice required by law.   23. The class of persons represented by Plaintiff is composed of all persons or entities  within the United States to whom Capital Funds sent facsimile advertisements promoting Capital  Funds and its services at any time within four years prior to the filing of the instant Complaint.    24. The class as defined above is identifiable by phone records, fax transmittal records,  and fax number databases, used by Capital Funds or its agents, in transmitting its unsolicited  facsimile advertisements.  On information and belief, the potential class members number in the  thousands and constitutes a class so numerous that joinder of all class members is impracticable.   The Plaintiff is a member of the class.   25. There are questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff and to the proposed class,  including but not limited to the following:  a. Whether Capital Funds violated the TCPA, and FCC promulgating  regulations, by engaging in illegal fax advertising;  b. Whether the facsimiles sent by Capital Funds to class members constitute  unsolicited advertisements; and  c. Whether the Plaintiff and the members of the class are entitled to statutory  damages as a result of Capital Funds’s actions.   27. Plaintiff is an adequate representative of the class because its interests do not conflict  with the interests of the class, it will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class, and it  is represented by counsel skilled and experienced in class actions.   28. Common questions of law and fact predominate over questions affecting only  individual members of the class, and a class action is the superior method for fair and efficient  adjudication of the controversy.  The only individual question concerns identification of class  members, which will be ascertainable from records maintained by Capital Funds and/or its  agents.   29. The likelihood that individual members of the class will prosecute separate actions is  remote due to the time and expense necessary to conduct such litigation.   30. Plaintiff is not aware of any litigation concerning this controversy already  commenced by others who meet the criteria for class membership described above.     31. Plaintiff is capable of and willing to represent the other members of the class.   32. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set forth  herein.   33. Capital Funds, or its agents, caused unsolicited facsimile advertisements to be sent to  Plaintiff and to the facsimile machines of other members of the class, in violation of the TCPA  and the FCC’s promulgating regulations.   35. By causing unsolicited facsimile advertisements to be sent to the Plaintiff and the  class, Capital Funds caused Plaintiff and class members to sustain property damage and cost in  the form of paper and toner.   36. By causing unsolicited facsimile advertisements to be sent to the Plaintiff and the  class, Capital Funds interfered with Plaintiff’s and class members’ use of their property as  Plaintiff’s and class members’ facsimile machines were encumbered by the transmission of  Capital Funds’s unsolicited facsimile advertisements.   37. By causing unsolicited facsimile advertisements to be sent to the Plaintiff and the  class, Capital Funds caused the facsimile machines of Plaintiff and class members to be  encumbered by the transmission of unsolicited facsimiles.   38. Capital Funds failed to provide the requisite Opt Out Notice on its advertisements  informing the recipient of their right to cease receiving such advertisements and a cost free  mechanism to make such request.   39. Failure to provide Opt Out Notice on a facsimile advertisement is a separate and  distinct violation of the TCPA.   40. The TCPA provides for statutory damages in the amount of a minimum of $500 for  each separate violation of the TCPA.  The damages suffered by the Plaintiff and the class it seeks  to represent are negligent or willful.    41. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations from all previous paragraphs as if fully set forth  herein.   43. The Plaintiff, acting on behalf of the Class, respectfully petitions the Court to order  Capital Funds to immediately cease engaging in unsolicited facsimile advertising in violation of  the TCPA. 