 (Deceptive Acts Or Practices, New York Gen. Bus. Law § 349)   (False Advertising, New York Gen. Bus. Law § 350)   18.  Plaintiff seeks to represent a class defined as all persons in the who purchased  Pampers “natural clean” Wipes in the state of New York.   19.  Members of the Class are so numerous that their individual joinder herein is  impracticable.  The precise number of Class members and their identities are unknown to  Plaintiff at this time but may be determined through discovery.  Class members may be notified  of the pendency of this action by mail and/or publication through the distribution records of  Defendant and third-party retailers and vendors.   20.  Common questions of law and fact exist as to all Class members and predominate  over questions affecting only individual Class members.  Common legal and factual questions  include, but are not limited to: (a) whether Defendant misrepresented and/or failed to disclose  material facts concerning the Wipes; and (b) Whether Defendant’s conduct was unfair and/or  deceptive.   21.  The claims of the named Plaintiff are typical of the claims of the Class in that the  named Plaintiff purchased one or more containers of Wipes.   23.  The class mechanism is superior to other available means for the fair and efficient  adjudication of the claims of Class members.  Each individual Class member may lack the  resources to undergo the burden and expense of individual prosecution of the complex and  extensive litigation necessary to establish Defendant’s liability.  Individualized litigation  increases the delay and expense to all parties and multiplies the burden on the judicial system  presented by the complex legal and factual issues of this case.  Individualized litigation also  presents a potential for inconsistent or contradictory judgments.  In contrast, the class action  device presents far fewer management difficulties and provides the benefits of single  adjudication, economy of scale, and comprehensive supervision by a single court on the issue of  Defendant’s liability.  Class treatment of the liability issues will ensure that all claims and  claimants are before this Court for consistent adjudication of the liability issues.  24.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in all  preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.   25.  Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the members of the  proposed Class against Defendant.   26.  By the acts and conduct alleged herein, Defendant committed unfair or deceptive  acts and practices by misrepresenting that the Wipes were natural when they contained unnatural  and potentially harmful chemicals.   27.  The foregoing deceptive acts and practices were directed at consumers.   29.  Plaintiff and Class members were injured as a direct and proximate result of  Defendant’s violation because (a) they would not have purchased the Wipes had they known that  the “natural clean” representation was false and misleading,” (b) they overpaid for the Wipes  because it is sold at a price premium when compared to similar products that do not contain this  misrepresentation, and (c) the Wipes did not have the characteristics, uses, or benefits as  promised.     30.  On behalf of herself and other members of the Class, Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the  unlawful acts and practices described herein, to recover her actual damages or fifty dollars,  whichever is greater, three times actual damages, and reasonable attorneys’ fees.  31.  Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in all  preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.   32.  Plaintiff brings this claim individually and on behalf of the members of the  proposed Class against Defendant.   33.  Based on the foregoing, Defendant has engaged in consumer-oriented conduct  that is deceptive or misleading in a material way which constitutes false advertising in violation  of Section 350 of the New York General Business Law by misrepresenting the nature of the  Wipes.     34.  The foregoing advertising was directed at consumers and was likely to mislead a  reasonable consumer acting reasonably under the circumstances.   36.  Plaintiff and Class members were injured as a direct and proximate result of  Defendant’s violation because (a) they would not have purchased the Wipes had they known that  the “natural clean” representation was false and misleading,” (b) they overpaid for the Wipes  because it is sold at a price premium when compared to similar products that do not contain this  misrepresentation, and (c) the Wipes did not have the characteristics, uses, or benefits as  promised.   37.  On behalf of herself and other members of the Class, Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the  unlawful acts and practices described herein, to recover actual damages or five hundred dollars  per violation, whichever is greater, three times actual damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees. 