23.  Plaintiff restates and realleges paragraphs 1 through 22 as though fully set forth  herein.   24.  Defendant repeatedly sent or caused to be sent frequent non-emergency text  messages, including but not limited to the messages referenced above, to Plaintiff’s cellular  telephone number using a telephone facsimile machine (“TFM”) or transmitting text without  Plaintiff’s prior consent in violation of 47 U.S.C. §227 (b)(1)(C).   25.  The TCPA defines TFM as “equipment which has the capacity…to transcribe text  or images, or both from paper into an electronic signal and to transmit that signal over a regular  telephone line.” 47 U.S.C. §227(a)(3).   26.  Alternatively, Defendant sent these texts an automated telephone dialing system  (“ATDS”) in violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(iii). The TCPA, under 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1),  defines an ATDS as “equipment which has the capacity...to store or produce telephone numbers  to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and to dial such numbers.”     28.  Upon information and belief, the system employed by Defendant to place text  messages to Plaintiff’s cellular phone has the capacity – (A) to store or produce telephone numbers  to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.   29.  Defendant violated the TCPA by placing numerous text messages to Plaintiff’s  cellular phone using an ATDS without his consent. Plaintiff repeatedly placed Defendant on notice  that he was the wrong party and that they did not have his consent to contact him.        30.  The text messages placed by Defendant to Plaintiff were not for emergency  purposes as defined by the TCPA under 47 U.S.C. §227(b)(1)(A)(i).   31.  Upon information and belief, based on the frequency and content of the text  messages, Defendant used a TFM or ATDS.   32.  Defendant violated the TCPA by sending numerous text messages to Plaintiff’s  cellular phone using a TFM or ATDS without his prior consent.   33.  As pled above, Plaintiff was severely harmed by Defendant’s text messages sent  to his cellular phone.   34.  Upon information and belief, Defendant has no system in place to document and  archive whether it has consent to continue to contact consumers on their cellular phones.   35.  Upon information and belief, Defendant knew its marketing practices were in  violation of the TCPA, yet continued to employ them to increase profits at Plaintiff’s expense.   36.  Defendant, through its agents, representatives, subsidiaries, and/or employees  acting within the scope of their authority acted intentionally in violation of 47 U.S.C.  §227(b)(1)(C).   8.  Around November 2020, Plaintiff began receiving numerous unsolicited and  unwanted text messages and phone calls from Defendant to his cellular phone number, (360) 