37.   Numerosity:  The class described above is so numerous that joinder of all individual  members in one action would be impracticable. The disposition of the individual claims of the  respective class members through this class action will benefit both the parties and this Court.    38.    Common Questions of Fact and Law: There is a well-defined community of  interest and common questions of fact and law affecting members of the class in that they all have  been and/or are being denied their civil rights to full and equal access to, and use and enjoyment  of, Defendants’ facilities and/or services due to Defendants’ failure to make their Kiosks fully  accessible and independently usable as above described.    39.  Typicality: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of the class.  The claims of the Plaintiff and members of the class are based on the same legal theories and arise  from the same unlawful conduct.    40.   Adequacy of Representation: Plaintiff is an adequate representative of the class  because his interests do not conflict with the interests of the members of the class. Plaintiff will  fairly, adequately, and vigorously represent and protect the interests of the members of the class  and has no interests antagonistic to the members of the class. Plaintiff has retained counsel who  are competent and experienced in the prosecution of class action litigation, generally, and who  possess specific expertise in the context of class litigation under the ADA.    41.   Class certification is appropriate pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) because  Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, making  appropriate both declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to Plaintiff and the Class as a whole.  