22. Sometime before January 25, 2019, Plaintiff is alleged to have incurred certain  financial obligations to the Southern California Gas Company, the “original  creditor.”   23. These financial obligations were primarily for personal, family or household  purposes and are therefore a “debt” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C.             § 1692a(5).   24. These alleged obligations were money, property, or their equivalent, which is  due or owing, or alleged to be due or owing, from a natural person to another  person and are therefore a “debt” as that term is defined by California Civil  Code § 1788.2(d), and a “consumer debt” as that term is defined by California  Civil Code § 1788.2(f).   25. Sometime thereafter, but before January 25, 2019, Plaintiff allegedly fell behind  in the payments allegedly owed on the alleged debt.  As it is irrelevant to this  action, Plaintiff currently takes no position as to the validity of this alleged debt.   26. Sometime before January 25, 2019, the alleged debt was assigned, placed, or  otherwise transferred to Defendant for collection.   27. On or about January 25, 2019, Defendant mailed Plaintiff a dunning letter in the  form of a post card, which was not sealed inside an envelope, in attempt to  collect the alleged debt. A few days later Plaintiff received that post card.   28. This communication to Plaintiff was a “communication” as that term is defined  by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2).   43. Plaintiff brings this case as a Class Action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 on  behalf of Plaintiff and all others similarly situated.   44. Plaintiff also represents, and is a member of, the following sub-class                (the “Sub-Class”) defined as:  All persons with addresses within the State of California who  Defendant sent a post card collection communication that was  substantially similar or identical to the post card sent to  Plaintiff, within one (1) year prior to the filing of this  Complaint in this action.   44. Plaintiff represents, and is a member of, the following class (the “Class”)   defined as:  All persons within the United States who Defendant sent a post  card collection communication that was substantially similar or  identical to the post card sent to Plaintiff, within one (1) year  prior to the filing of this Complaint in this action.   45. Plaintiff represents, and is a member of, the Class because Plaintiff received a  written communication from Defendant as described above in Defendant’s  attempt to collect a debt.   46. Defendant, its employees and agents are excluded from the Class.     47. Plaintiff does not know the number of members in the Class, but believes the  Class’ members number in the thousands, if not more. Thus, this matter should  be certified as a Class Action to assist in the expeditious litigation of this  matter.   55. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates by reference, all other paragraphs.   56. The foregoing acts and omissions constitute numerous and multiple violations  of the FDCPA, including but not limited to each and every one of the above- cited provisions of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692, et seq.   57. As a result of each and every violation of the FDCPA, Plaintiffs and the Class  and Sub-Class members are each entitled to any actual damages pursuant to 15  U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(1); statutory damages in an amount up to $1,000.00 pursuant  to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(A); and, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs  pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3) from each Defendant individually.  58. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates by reference, all other paragraphs.   59. The foregoing acts and omissions constitute numerous and multiple violations  of the Rosenthal Act, including but not limited to each and every one of the  above-cited provisions of the Rosenthal Act, Cal. Civ. Code §§ 1788, et seq.   FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT (FDCPA)  15 U.S.C. §§ 1692, ET SEQ.   ROSENTHAL FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT (ROSENTHAL ACT)  CAL. CIV. CODE §§ 1788, ET SEQ.  