12. At all times relevant, Plaintiff was a citizen of the State of California.  Plaintiff is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a “person” as defined by 47  43. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others  similarly situated (“the Class”).   44. Plaintiff represents, and is a member of, the Class, consisting of:   a.All persons within the United States who had or have a number  assigned to a cellular telephone service, who received at least one call  using an ATDS and/or an artificial prerecorded voice from Defendants  Friendlum, Inc., d/b/a Direct Home Energy Solutions, between the date  of filing this action and the four years preceding, where such calls were  placed for the marketing purposes, to non-customers of Defendants  Friendlum, Inc., d/b/a Direct Home Energy Solutions, at the time of the  calls.   46. Plaintiff and members of the Class were harmed by the acts of Defendants in  at least the following ways: Defendants illegally contacted Plaintiff and the  Class members via their cellular telephones thereby causing Plaintiff and the  Class members to incur certain cellular telephone charges or reduce cellular  telephone time for which Plaintiff and the Class members previously paid, by  having to retrieve or administer  messages left by Defendants or their agents,  during those illegal calls, and invading the privacy of said Plaintiff and the  Class members.  Plaintiff and the Class members were damaged thereby.   47. This suit seeks only damages and injunctive relief for recovery of economic  injury on behalf of the Class and it expressly is not intended to request any  recovery for personal injury and claims related thereto.  Plaintiff reserves the  right to expand the Class definition to seek recovery on behalf of additional  persons as warranted as facts are learned in further investigation and  discovery.   48. The joinder of the Class members is impractical and the disposition of their  claims in the Class action will provide substantial benefits both to the parties  and to the Court.  The Class can be identified through Defendants’ records  and/or Defendants’ agent’s records.   50. As a person that received calls from Defendants in which Defendants used an  ATDS or an artificial or prerecorded voice, without Plaintiff’s prior express  consent, Plaintiff is asserting claims that are typical of the Class. Plaintiff will  fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the Class in that  Plaintiff has no interests antagonistic to any member of the Class.   51. Plaintiff and the members of the Class have all suffered irreparable harm as a  result of the Defendants’ unlawful and wrongful conduct.  Absent a class  action, the Class will continue to face the potential for irreparable harm.  In  addition, these violations of law will be allowed to proceed without remedy  and Defendants will likely continue such illegal conduct.  The size of Class  member’s individual claims causes, few, if any, Class members to be able to  afford to seek legal redress for the wrongs complained of herein.   52. Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in handling class action claims and  claims involving violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.   54. Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby  making appropriate final injunctive relief and corresponding declaratory relief  with respect to the Class as a whole.  55. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   56. The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendants constitute numerous and  multiple negligent violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each  and every one of the above-cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.   57. As a result of Defendants’ negligent violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.,  Plaintiff and the Class are entitled to an award of $500.00 in statutory  damages, for each and every violation, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).   58. Plaintiff and the Class are also entitled to and seek injunctive relief  prohibiting such conduct in the future.  59. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this  Complaint as though fully stated herein.   61. As a result of Defendants’ knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. §  227 et seq., Plaintiff and each of the Class are entitled to treble damages, as  provided by statute, up to $1,500.00, for each and every violation, pursuant to  47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B) and 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C).   62. Plaintiff and the Class are also entitled to and seek injunctive relief  prohibiting such conduct in the future.  64. As a result of Defendants’ negligent violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1),  Plaintiff  seeks  for  himself and each Class member $500.00 in statutory  damages, for each and every violation, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).   65. Pursuant to 47  U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(A), injunctive relief prohibiting such  conduct in the future.   66. Any other relief the Court may deem just and proper.  67. As a result of Defendants’ willful and/or knowing violations of 47 U.S.C. §  227(b)(1), Plaintiff seeks for himself and each Class member treble damages,  as provided by statute, up to $1,500.00 for each and every violation, pursuant  to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B) and 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C).   69. Any other relief the Court may deem just and proper.  KNOWING AND/OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE  CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   NEGLIGENT VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER  PROTECTION ACT 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   THE TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   VIOLATION  OF THE TCPA, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.  