12.  On information and belief, Defendants are for-profit entities that are in the  compounding pharmaceutical business and are licensed in 26 states.    13.  On or about January 17, 2020, Defendants sent an unsolicited facsimile to Plaintiff  using a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other device.  See Exhibit A.   Plaintiff received  the Fax on a stand-alone fax machine.   14.  The first page of the Fax states in part the following:   24.  Class Size (Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)): Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon  such information and belief avers, that the number of persons and entities of the proposed Class is  numerous and joinder of all members is impracticable. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon  such information and belief avers, that the number of class members is at least forty.   26.  Typicality (Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3)):  Plaintiff's claims are typical of the claims of  all class members. Plaintiff received the same or similar fax as the faxes sent by or on behalf of  Defendants advertising the commercially availability and/or quality of property, goods or services  of Defendants during the Class Period. Plaintiff is making the same claims and seeking the same  relief for itself and all class members based upon the same federal statute. Defendants have acted  in the same or in a similar manner with respect to Plaintiff and all the class members by sending  Plaintiff and each member of the class the same or similar fax or faxes which did not contain  compliant opt-out language or were sent without prior express invitation or permission.   29.  The TCPA makes it unlawful for any person to “use any telephone facsimile  machine, computer or other device to send, to a telephone facsimile machine, an unsolicited  advertisement . . . .” 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C).   30.  The TCPA defines “unsolicited advertisement” as “any material advertising the  commercial availability or quality of any property, goods, or services which is transmitted to any  person without that person's prior express invitation or permission, in writing or otherwise.”  47 U.S.C. § 227 (a) (5).   34.  Defendants’ Other Violations.  Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon such  information and belief avers, that during the period preceding four years of the filing of this  Complaint and repeatedly thereafter, Defendants have sent via facsimile transmission from  telephone facsimile machines, computers, or other devices to telephone facsimile machines faxes  other than Exhibit A that constitute advertisements under the TCPA that were transmitted to  persons or entities without their prior express invitation or permission (and/or that Defendants are  precluded from sustaining the established business relationship safe harbor due to their failure to  comply with the Opt-Out Notice Requirements). By virtue thereof, Defendants violated the TCPA  and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon such  information and belief avers, that Defendants may be continuing to send unsolicited  advertisements via facsimile transmission in violation of the TCPA and the regulations  promulgated thereunder, and absent intervention by this Court, will do so in the future.   35.  The TCPA provides a private right of action to bring this action on behalf of  Plaintiff and Plaintiff Class to redress Defendants’ violations of the Act, and provides for statutory  damages. 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3). The Act also provides that injunctive relief is appropriate. Id.   36.  The TCPA is a strict liability statute, so Defendants are liable to Plaintiff and the  other class members even if its actions were only negligent.  