25.  On or about July 12, 2018, Defendant called Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number  ending in 6305 (“6305 Number”) with a pre-recorded message.    26.  Upon Plaintiff answering the phone, a pre-recorded message asked Plaintiff to press 1  if he was interested in purchasing insurance.   27.  After Plaintiff pressed 1, he was connected to a live representative who notified Plaintiff  that he was an employee of Defendant and that he wanted to sell Plaintiff insurance.   28.  Once the call was concluded, Defendant caused the following text message to be  transmitted to the 6305 Number:   29.  The text message includes a hyperlink to a website which is owned and/or operated by  Defendant.     30.  Upon Plaintiff clicking the hyperlink, Plaintiff was directed to an application for  healthcare which was filled out with Plaintiff’s information.   32.  Plaintiff did not sign the agreement.   33.  Consequently, Defendant sent Plaintiff the following cancellation email on August 8,  2018 from its CSR@adroithealthgroup.com email address:   34.  Plaintiff is the subscriber and sole user of the 6305 Number.   35.  Defendant called Plaintiff from 941-735-6253, a number which upon information and  belief, Defendant owned and/or operated.    37.  Plaintiff received the subject calls within this judicial district and, therefore, Defendant’s  violation of the TCPA occurred within this district.     38.  Upon information and belief, Defendant caused similar calls to be sent to individuals  residing within this judicial district.     39.  At no point in time did Plaintiff provide Defendant with his express consent to be  contacted using a pre-recorded message.     40.  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.    41.  Plaintiff brings this case as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, on behalf of  himself and all others similarly situated.   42.  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 pre-recorded call,  from Defendant or anyone on Defendant’s behalf, to said person’s  cellular telephone number, without their prior express written  consent.     43.  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.  46.  There are numerous questions of law and fact common to the Class which predominate  over any questions affecting only individual members of the Class.  Among the questions of law and  fact common to the Class are:  (1) Whether Defendant made non-emergency calls to Plaintiff and Class members’  cellular telephones using pre-recorded messages;  (2) Whether Defendant can meet their burden of showing that they obtained prior  express written consent to make such calls;  (3) Whether Defendant’s conduct was knowing and willful;  (4) Whether Defendant is liable for damages, and the amount of such damages; and  (5) Whether Defendant should be enjoined from such conduct in the future.   52.  Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth  herein.    53.  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).    54.  Defendant – or third parties directed by Defendant – used pre-recorded calls to  make non-emergency marketing telephone calls to the cellular telephones of Plaintiff and other  members of the Class.   55.  These calls were made without regard to whether Defendant had first obtained  express written consent from the called party to make such calls. In fact, Defendant did not have  prior express written consent to call the cell phones of Plaintiff and the other members of the  putative Class when its calls were made.    56.  Defendant violated § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii) of the TCPA by using a pre-recorded  message to make non-emergency telephone calls to the cell phones of Plaintiff and the other  members of the putative Class without their prior express consent.    PROPOSED CLASS   Violations of the TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)  (On Behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)  