12.  Subway’s unsolicited texts were a nuisance that aggravated Plaintiff, wasted his  time, invaded his privacy, diminished the value of the cellular services he paid for, caused him to  temporarily lose the use and enjoyment of his phone, and caused wear and tear to his phone’s data,  memory, software, hardware, and battery components.   14.  In sending the unsolicited text messages at issue, Subway, or a third party acting on its  behalf, utilized an automatic telephone dialing system; hardware and/or software with the capacity  to store or produce cellular telephone number to be called, using a random or sequential number  generator.  This is evident from the circumstances surrounding the text messages, including the  ability to trigger an automated response by replying “HELP” or “STOP,” the text messages’  commercial and generic content, that substantively identical texts were sent to multiple recipients,  and that they were sent from a short code, which is consistent with the use of an automatic telephone  dialing system to send text messages.   15.  Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure  23(b)(2) and Rule 23(b)(3) on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and seeks  certification of the following Class:  All persons who (1) on or after four years prior to the filing of the initial complaint  in this action, (2) were sent a text message by or on behalf of Subway, (3) using an  automatic telephone dialing system, (4) for the purpose of soliciting their purchase  of Subway products, and from whom (5) Subway (a) does not allege to have consent,  or (b) alleges to have obtained consent in the same manner it alleges to have obtained  consent from Plaintiff.   17.  Numerosity: The exact size of the Class is unknown and unavailable to Plaintiff at this  time, but it is clear that individual joinder is impracticable. On information and belief, Defendant  sent unsolicited text messages to thousands of individuals who fall into the Class definition. Class  membership can be easily determined from Defendant’s records.    18.  Typicality: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the other members of the Class.  Plaintiff is a member of the Class, and if Defendant violated the TCPA with respect to Plaintiff,  then it violated the TCPA with respect to the other members of the Class. Plaintiff and the Class  sustained the same damages as a result of Defendant’s uniform wrongful conduct.    19.  Commonality and Predominance: There are many questions of law and fact common  to the claims of Plaintiff and the Class, and those questions predominate over any questions that  may affect individual members of the Class. Common questions for the Class include, but are not  necessarily limited to the following:   a)  How Defendant gathered, compiled, or obtained the cellular telephone  numbers of Plaintiff and the Class;  b)  Whether the text messages were sent using an automatic telephone dialing  system;  c)  Whether Defendant’s text messages were sent for the purpose of marketing  Defendant’s services;  d)  Whether Defendant sent some or all of the text messages without the  consent of Plaintiff and the Class; and   e)  Whether Defendant’s conduct was willful and knowing such that Plaintiff  and the Class are entitled to treble damages.   21.  Policies Generally Applicable to the Class: This class action is appropriate for  certification because Defendant has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the  Class as a whole, thereby requiring the Court’s imposition of uniform relief to ensure compatible  standards of conduct toward the members of the Class, and making final injunctive relief  appropriate with respect to the Class as a whole. Defendant’s practices challenged herein apply to  and affect the members of the Class uniformly, and Plaintiff’s challenge of those practices hinges  on Defendant’s conduct with respect to the Class as a whole, not on facts or law applicable only to  Plaintiff.    22.  Superiority: This case is also appropriate for class certification because class  proceedings are superior to all other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this  controversy given that joinder of all parties is impracticable. The damages suffered by the individual  members of the Class will likely be relatively small, especially given the burden and expense of  individual prosecution of the complex litigation necessitated by Defendant’s actions. Thus, it would  be virtually impossible for the individual members of the Class to obtain effective relief from  Defendant’s misconduct. Even if members of the Class could sustain such individual litigation, it  would still not be preferable to a class action, because individual litigation would increase the delay  and expense to all parties due to the complex legal and factual controversies presented in this case.  By contrast, a class action presents far fewer management difficulties and provides the benefits of  single adjudication, economy of scale, and comprehensive supervision by a single court. Economies  of time, effort, and expense will be fostered and uniformity of decisions ensured.  23.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations of paragraphs 1 through 20 of this  complaint and incorporates them by reference.   24.  Defendant and/or its agents agent transmitted text messages to cellular telephone  numbers belonging to Plaintiff and the other members of the Class using equipment that, upon  information and belief, had the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using  a random or sequential number generator.   25.  These solicitation text messages were sent without the consent of Plaintiff and the other  members of the Class.   26.  Defendant has, therefore, violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii), and as a result, under  47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B), Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to a minimum of $500.00 in damages  for each violation.    27.  In the event that the Court determines that Defendant’s conduct was wilful and knowing,  it may, under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C), treble the amount of statutory damages recoverable by  Plaintiff and the Class.  8.  Subway is one of the largest fast food restaurant franchises in the world, with more  than 44,000 locations.      9.  As part of its national marketing plan, Subway sends consumers text messages  promoting Subway’s sandwiches and other menu offerings.  