43.  The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder is impracticable.  The  number of Class Members is approximately 360.  The number of job applicants harmed by  Defendant’s violations of the law is significantly greater than feasibly could be addressed  through joinder.  The precise number is uniquely within Defendant’s possession, and Class  Members may be notified of the pendency of this action by published and/or mailed notice.   44.  There are questions of law and fact common to the Class, and these questions  predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.  Defendant had a single,  uniform credit check procedure that was used for all job applicants.  Common questions include,  but are not limited to:   (1) Whether Defendant’s prior policy and practice to exclude job applicants  based on negative credit histories had a discriminatory disparate impact on  African American applicants;   (2) Whether Defendant’s prior policy and practice to exclude job applicants  based on their credit history is job-related and consistent with business  necessity;  (3) Whether there was a less discriminatory policy and practice that would have  met Defendant’s legitimate needs; and    45.  Plaintiff’s claim is typical of the claims of the Class: (1) Plaintiff applied for a job  with Defendant within the relevant time period; (2) Plaintiff was processed through the same  application procedure; (3) Plaintiff was subjected to the same screening device and hiring  process; (4) Plaintiff was denied the position; and (5) Plaintiff has the same discrimination claim  based on disparate impact.  All claims are shared by each and every class member.   47.  Plaintiff has retained counsel competent and experienced in complex class  actions, employment discrimination litigation, and the intersection thereof.   48.  Class certification is appropriate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b) due to: (1) the  risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual Class Members through  the prosecution of separate actions; and/or (2) the predominance of questions of law and/or fact  common to Class Members over any questions affecting only individual members, and the  superiority of a class action to other methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this  controversy. 