20.  Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of itself and all others similarly  situated under rules 23(a) and 23(b)(1)-(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   21.  Plaintiff seeks to represent three classes (the “Classes”) of individuals,  each defined as follows:  Class A:  All persons to whom, from four years prior to the date of the  filing of the Complaint through the present, Defendant sent or caused to be sent at  least one solicited or unsolicited facsimile advertisement advertising the  commercial availability or quality of any property, goods, or services that  contained a notice identical or substantially similar to the Opt-Out Notice in the  Fax Advertisements Defendant sent or caused to be sent to Plaintiff.  Class B:  All persons to whom, from four years prior to the date of the  filing of the Complaint through the present, Defendant sent or caused to be sent at  least one unsolicited facsimile advertisement advertising the commercial  availability or quality of any property, goods, or services that contained a notice  identical or substantially similar to the Opt-Out Notice on the Fax Advertisements  Defendant sent or caused to be sent to Plaintiff.  Class C:  All persons in the State of New York to whom, from three years  prior to the date of the filing of the Complaint through the present, Defendant sent  or caused to be sent at least one facsimile advertisement without having obtained  express invitation or permission to do so and/or that contained a notice identical  or substantially similar to the Opt-Out Notice on the Fax Advertisement  Defendant sent or caused to be sent to Plaintiff.   23.  Members of the Classes may be notified of the pendency of this action by  techniques and forms commonly used in class actions, such as by published notice,   e-mail notice, website notice, fax notice, first class mail, or combinations thereof, or by  other methods suitable to the Classes and deemed necessary and/or appropriate by the  Court.   24.  Typicality:  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of  Class A because the claims of Plaintiff and members of Class A are based on the same  legal theories and arise from the same unlawful conduct.  Among other things, Plaintiff  and members of Class A were sent or caused to be sent by Defendant at least one fax  advertisement advertising the commercial availability or quality of any property, goods,  or services that contained a notice identical or substantially similar to the Opt-Out Notice  in the Fax Advertisements that Defendant sent or caused to be sent to Plaintiff.   26.  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of Class C  because the claims of Plaintiff and members of Class C are based on the same legal  theories and arise from the same unlawful conduct.  Among other things, Plaintiff and  members of Class C were sent or caused to be sent by Defendant, without Plaintiff’s or  the Class C members’ express permission or invitation, at least one fax advertisement  advertising the commercial availability or quality of any property, goods, or services that  contained a notice identical or substantially similar to the Opt-Out Notice in the Fax  Advertisements that Defendant sent or caused to be sent to Plaintiff.    27.  Common Questions of Fact and Law:  There is a well-defined community  of common questions of fact and law affecting the Plaintiff and members of the Classes.   29.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and Class B  predominate over questions that may affect individual members, and include:  (a) Whether Defendant’s sending and/or causing to be sent to Plaintiff and  the members of Class B, without Plaintiff’s or the Class B members’ express  invitation or permission, by facsimile, computer or other device, fax  advertisements advertising the commercial availability or quality of any property,  goods, or services that contained a notice identical or substantially similar to the  Opt-Out Notice in the Fax Advertisements, violated 47 U.S.C. § 227(b) and the  regulations thereunder;  (b) Whether Defendant’s sending and/or causing to be sent to Plaintiff and  the members of Class B such unsolicited fax advertisements was knowing or  willful;  (c) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to statutory  damages, triple damages and costs for Defendant’s conduct; and   (d) Whether Plaintiff and members of Class B are entitled to a permanent  injunction enjoining Defendant from continuing to engage in its unlawful  conduct.   31.  Adequacy of Representation:  Plaintiff is an adequate representative of the  Classes because its interests do not conflict with the interests of the members of the  Classes.  Plaintiff will fairly, adequately and vigorously represent and protect the interests  of the members of the Classes and has no interests antagonistic to the members of the  Classes.  Plaintiff has retained counsel who are competent and experienced in litigation in  the federal courts, class action litigation, and TCPA cases.   32.  Superiority:  A class action is superior to other available means for the fair  and efficient adjudication of the Classes’ claims.  While the aggregate damages that may  be awarded to the members of the Classes are likely to be substantial, the damages  suffered by individual members of the Classes are relatively small.  The expense and  burden of individual litigation makes it economically infeasible and procedurally  impracticable for each member of the Classes to individually seek redress for the wrongs  done to them.  The likelihood of the individual Class members’ prosecuting separate  claims is remote.  Plaintiff is unaware of any other litigation concerning this controversy  already commenced against Defendant by any member of the Classes.   34.  Injunctive Relief:  Defendant has acted on grounds generally applicable to  the members of Classes A and B, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief with  respect to Classes A and B.  35.   Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in  paragraphs 1-34.   36.  By the conduct described above, Defendant committed more than five  thousand (5,000) violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(b) against Plaintiff and the members of  Class A, to wit: the fax advertisements Defendant sent and/or caused to be sent to  Plaintiff and the members of Class A were either (a) unsolicited and did not contain a  notice satisfying the requirements of the TCPA and regulations thereunder, or (b)  solicited and did not contain a notice satisfying the requirements of the TCPA and  regulations thereunder.   37.  Plaintiff and the members of Class A are entitled to statutory damages  under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b) in an amount greater than two million, five hundred thousand  dollars ($2,500,000).   39.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in  paragraphs 1-34.   40.  By the conduct described above, Defendant committed more than five  thousand (5,000) violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(b) against Plaintiff and the members of  Class B, to wit:  the fax advertisements Defendant sent and/or caused to be sent to  Plaintiff and the members of Class B were unsolicited and did not contain notices  satisfying the requirements of the TCPA and regulations thereunder.   41.  Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to statutory damages  under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b) in an amount greater than two million, five hundred thousand  dollars ($2,500,000).   42.  If it is found that Defendant willfully and/or knowingly sent and/or caused  to be sent unsolicited fax advertisements that did not contain a notice satisfying the  requirements of the TCPA and regulations thereunder to Plaintiff and the members of  Class B, Plaintiff requests that the Court increase the damage award against Defendant to  three times the amount available under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B), as authorized by 47  U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).  43.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in  paragraphs 1-34.   44.  Defendant committed thousands of violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227(b).   46.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation contained in  paragraphs 1-33.   47.  By the conduct described above, Defendant committed numerous  violations of GBL § 396-aa against Plaintiff and the members of Class C, to wit: the fax  advertisements Defendant sent and/or caused to be sent to Plaintiff and the members of  Class C were unsolicited and/or did not contain notices satisfying the requirements of  GBL § 396-aa.   48.  Pursuant to GBL § 396-aa, Plaintiff and the members of Class C are  entitled to statutory damages in an amount to be determined at trial. 