13.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff was a “person” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 153(39).   14.  Defendant is and at all times mentioned herein was, an entity that meets the  definition of “person,” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 153(39).   15.  On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant conducts business in  the State of Texas and within this judicial district.   16.  During the relevant time period, Defendant called Plaintiff on his telephone while  he was located in the State of Texas in an attempt to solicit a variety of pharmaceutical  prescription products, including but not limited to, pain cream.  Plaintiff received multiple such  calls and has, at the time of the filing of this complaint, received approximately nine (9) calls  from Defendant.   17.  On information and belief, Defendant, or its agents, called Plaintiff on his  telephone via an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS), as defined by 47 U.S.C. §  227(a)(1).  This ATDS has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using  a random or sequential number generator.   18.  Plaintiff did not provide express consent to receive automated calls by Defendant  on his telephone.6   20.  Under the TCPA and pursuant to the FCC’s January 2012 Declaratory Ruling, the  burden is on Defendant to demonstrate that Plaintiff provided express consent within the  meaning of the statute.7  VI.  21.  Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of all other persons  similarly situated (hereinafter referred to as “the Class”).   22.  Plaintiff proposes the following Class definition, subject to amendment as  appropriate:  All persons within the United States who received a non-emergency telephone call  from Defendant through the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an  artificial or prerecorded voice and who did not provide prior express consent for  such calls.  Collectively, all these persons will be referred to as “Class members.” Plaintiff represents, and is  a member of, the Class.  Excluded from the Class are Defendant and any entities in which  Defendant has a controlling interest; Defendant’s agents and employees; any Judge and/or  Magistrate Judge to whom this action is assigned and any member of such Judges’ staffs and  immediate families; and claims for personal injury, wrongful death and/or emotional distress.   23.  On information and belief, Plaintiff believes there are thousands of Class  members geographically dispersed throughout the United States.  Therefore, individual joinder  of all members of the Class would be impracticable.   25.  This Class Action Complaint seeks injunctive relief and money damages.   26.  The joinder of all Class members is impracticable due to the size and relatively  modest value of each individual claim. The disposition of the claims in a class action will  provide substantial benefit to the parties and the Court in avoiding a multiplicity of identical  suits.  The Class can be identified easily through records maintained by Defendant.   27.  There are well-defined, nearly identical, questions of law and fact affecting all  parties.  The questions of law and fact involving the class claims predominate over questions that  may affect individual Class members.  Those common questions of law and fact include, but are  not limited to, the following:  a.  Whether Defendant made non-emergency calls to Plaintiff’s and Class  members’ telephones using an automatic telephone dialing system and/or  an artificial or prerecorded voice;  b.   Whether Defendant can meet its burden of showing they obtained prior  express consent (i.e., consent that is clearly and unmistakably stated) to  make such calls;  c.  Whether Defendant’s conduct was knowing and/or willful;  d.  Whether Defendant is liable for damages, and the amount of such  damages; and  e.  Whether Defendant should be enjoined from engaging in such conduct in  the future.   28.  As a person who received calls from Defendant using an automatic telephone  dialing system and/or an artificial or prerecorded voice, without prior express consent within the  meaning of the TCPA, Plaintiff asserts claims that are typical of each Class member.  Plaintiff  will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the Class, and has no interests  that are antagonistic to any member of the Class.   29.   Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in handling class action claims  involving violations of federal and state consumer and employee protection statutes.   31.   Defendant has acted on grounds generally applicable to the Class, thereby  making final injunctive relief and corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the Class as a  whole appropriate. Moreover, on information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that the TCPA  violations complained of herein are substantially likely to continue in the future if an injunction  is not entered.  32.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as  if fully stated herein.   33.   The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitutes numerous and  multiple knowing and/or willful violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each of the  above- cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq.   34.   As a result of Defendant’s knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227  et seq., Plaintiff and members of the Class are entitled to treble damages of up to $1,500.00 for  each and every call in violation of the statute, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(C).   36.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and  costs.  37.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as  if fully set forth herein.   38.  The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitutes numerous and multiple  violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each of the above cited provisions of 47  U.S.C. § 227 et seq.   39.  As a result of Defendant’s violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq., Plaintiff and  Class members are entitled to an award of $500.00 in statutory damages for each and every call  in violation of the statute, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).   40.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to and do seek injunctive relief  prohibiting Defendant’s violation of the TCPA in the future.   41.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and  costs.   Knowing and/or Willful Violations of the Telephone Consumer  Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.  