18.  Defendant maintains a program for Defendant’s customers who purchase a variety  of items from Defendant, thereby giving customers awards and incentives to purchase from  Defendant, which Defendant refers to as the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program.”   22.  Specifically, in describing the purpose of this program to customers, the  “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program Terms and Conditions” state:  “1. Membership: Participation in the Bloomingdale's Loyallist  program ("Program") and the benefits of the Program are offered at  the sole discretion of Bloomingdale's ("Bloomingdale's," "us," or  "our"). Eligible customers (as described below) may enroll.  Bloomingdale's  Store and Bloomingdale's  American  Express®  cardholders are automatically enrolled.  All other eligible customers  must enroll with a store associate.  You do not need a Bloomingdale's  Store or Bloomingdale's American Express card to enroll in the  Program.  Upon enrolling, you will be assigned a Bloomingdale's  Loyallist account ("Rewards Account"), a Bloomingdale's Loyallist  Account number ("Rewards Number"), and certain customers will also  receive a Membership card (the "Membership card"). As you shop,  you accumulate points in your Rewards Account, as described below,  that may be issued as a Loyallist Reward Card ("Reward Card") from  time to time, which you may then use to shop at Bloomingdale's,  bloomingdales.com, and Bloomingdale's The Outlet Store.”   23.  Defendant does not advise participants or potential participants in any fashion that  Defendant will send texts to participants on participants’ cellular telephones.    24.  In joining the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program,” participants do not sign or  otherwise give their express consent to receive any texts from Defendant which advertise or  relate to any other of Defendant’s products or services.    25.  Nor does Defendant ask any participants in the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist  Program” to give their consent in any manner to receive texts from Defendant.  Indeed, in joining  the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program” participants   are not asked to sign any type of consent form.    26.  Despite this, as a matter of uniform policy, Defendant sends uniformly-worded  text messages to all participants in the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program” which ask  consumers if they would like to receive promotional offers from Defendant via text message on  their cellular telephones.   28.  On or about April 13, 2015, Defendant began using Plaintiff’s cellular telephone  for the purpose of sending Plaintiff spam advertisements and/or promotional offers, via text  message, including a text message sent to and received by Plaintiff on or about April 13, 2015, at  11:30 a.m.    29.  Plaintiff received the aforementioned text message from Defendant, which was  sent to his cellular phone ending in 2768.  The message was sent with a message code 256-66  and indicated as follows:  Bloomingdale’s Promo Alerts: Reply Y now to confirm you want texts!  Reply HELP for help. 1 msg/wk. MSG&Data Rates May Apply. Q’s 800- 777-0000   30.  As outlined herein, Plaintiff and the class never gave express consent to receive  text messages at any time for any reason containing spam or advertisements from Defendant, as  required by the plain language of the TCPA, on their cellular telephones.   31.  By signing up for the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program,” and entering  Plaintiff’s contact information, Plaintiff did not, as a matter of law and fact, give consent to  receive promotional or advertising text messages from Defendant via their cellular telephones.   36.  The text message sent to Plaintiff’s cellular telephone described herein was sent  via an “automatic telephone dialing system,” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227 (a)(1) and as  prohibited by 47 U.S.C. § 227 (b)(1)(A).   37.  The telephone number to which Defendant, or its agent, sent its unsolicited text  message was assigned to a cellular telephone service for which Plaintiff incurs a charge pursuant  to 47 U.S.C. § 227 (b)(1).   38.  The unsolicited text message to Plaintiff was made for general   marketing purposes.      39.  The general marketing commercial text which was sent to Plaintiff and The Class  was not sent for emergency purposes as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227 (b)(1)(A)(i).    40.  The unsolicited commercial texts violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1).  41.  Plaintiff brings this action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 on behalf of a proposed class  defined as:  All persons within the United States who received any  solicitation/telemarketing text messages from Defendant to said  person’s cellular telephone made through the use of any automatic  telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice and  such person had not previously consented to receiving such calls  within the four years prior to the filing of this Complaint   42.  The Class for whose benefit this action is brought are each so   numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.    43.  The exact number and identities of the persons who fit within the proposed class  are each ascertainable in that Defendant maintains written and electronically stored data showing  the name and address of each participant in “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program.” Records  showing all texts sent to such persons by Defendant and all other data needed to identify The  Class.    44.  The proposed Class is composed of over 10,000 persons.   46.  There are common questions of law and fact affecting the rights of the class  members, including, inter alia, the following:  a.   Whether, within the four years prior to the filing of this Complaint, Defendant  made any telemarketing/solicitation text message (other than a text  message made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express  consent of the called party) to a Class member using any automatic  telephone dialing system to any telephone number assigned to a cellular  telephone service;  b.  Whether Plaintiff and The Class were damages thereby, and the extent of  damages for such violation; and  c.  Whether Defendant should be enjoined from engaging in such conduct in  the future.   47.  Plaintiff is a member of The Class he seeks to represent in that he   was a participant in the “Bloomingdale’s Loyallist Program,” who, between April 13, 2015, and  the present, received one or more text messages from Defendant, without Plaintiff’s explicit  consent to do so via an “automated telephone dialing system.”   48.  The claims of Plaintiff are not only typical of The Class members, they are  identical in that they arise from Defendant’s uniform policies and form documents, and are based  on the same legal theories of all class members.    49.  Plaintiff has no interest antagonistic to, or in conflict with, The Class.   50.  Plaintiff will thoroughly and adequately protect the interests of The Class, having  retained qualified and competent legal counsel to represent himself and The Class.   51.  Defendant has acted and refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the  class, thereby making appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief for the class as a whole.   53.  A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient  adjudication of the controversy since, inter alia, the damages suffered by each class member  were less than $1500 per person and individual actions to recoup such an amount are not  economically feasible.   54.  Common questions will predominate, and there will be no unusual manageability  issues.   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 Defendant 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 Defendant’s 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.  60.  The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitute numerous and multiple  knowing and/or willful 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.   61.  As a result of Defendant’s knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et  seq., Plaintiff and The Class are entitled to an award of $1,500.00 in statutory damages, 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.  ///  ///  KNOWING AND/OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS   OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   NEGLIGENT VIOLATIONS OF THE TCPA 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.  