26.  Plaintiff brings this class action for Defendants’ violations of the TCPA and GBL  399-p, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, under Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(1)- 8  23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   27.  Plaintiff seek to represent three classes of individuals (“the Classes”) defined as  follows:  Class A: All persons in the United States, from four years prior to the filing of the instant  Complaint through the date of the filing of the instant Complaint, to whom Defendants, using the  autodialer, made a call or caused to be made a call to the person’s cellular telephone or  residential telephone and left a prerecorded or artifical-voice message identical or substantially  similar to the messages Defendants left for Plaintiff descibed above, without obtaining the  person’s prior express consent.  Class B: All persons in the United States, from October 16, 2013 through the date of the  filing of the instant Complaint, to whom Defendants, using the autodialer, made a call or caused  to be made a call to the person’s cellular telephone or residential telephone and left a prerecorded  or artifical-voice message identical or substantially similar to the messages Defendants left for  Plaintiff descibed above, without obtaining the person’s prior express written consent.  Class C: All persons in New York State from three years prior to the filing of the instant  Complaint through the date of the filing of the instant Complaint, whom Defendants called or  caused to be made a call using the autodialer, where the calls contained a prerecorded message  identical or substantially similar to the messages described above that Defendants left for  Plaintiff which message did not state at the end the address and telephone number of the person  on whose behalf the call was being transmitted.   28.  Numerosity: The Classes are so numerous that joinder of all individual members  in one action would be impracticable. The disposition of the individual claims of the respective  Classes’ members through this class action will benefit both the parties and this Court.   9   29.  Upon information and belief Classes A, B and C contain at a minimum thousands  of members.   30.  Upon information and belief, the Classes’ sizes and the identities of the individual  members thereof are ascertainable through Defendants’ records, including, but not limited to  Defendants’ call records.   31.   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.    32.  Typicality:  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of the  Classes.  The claims of the Plaintiff and members of the Classes are based on the same legal  theories and arise from the same unlawful conduct.   33.  Defendants, using the autodialer, initiated or caused to be initiated at least one  telephone call to Plaintiff’s and each member of Class A’s cellular telephone line or residential  telephone line, which telephone call contained a pre-recorded and/or artificial voice message  identical or substantially similar to the messages described above that Defendants left for  Plaintiff, where Defendants did not receive prior express consent to make such call to the called  party.   34.  Defendants, using the autodialer, initiated or caused to be initiated at least one  telephone call to Plaintiff’s and each member of Class B’s cellular telephone line or residential  telephone line, which telephone call contained a pre-recorded and/or artificial voice message  identical or substantially similar to the messages described above that Defendants left for  Plaintiff, where Defendants did not receive prior express consent to make such call to the called  10  party.   35.  Defendants, using the autodialer, initiated or caused to be initiated at least one  telephone call to Plaintiff and each member of Class C, which contained a pre-recorded and/or  artificial voice message identical or substantially similar to the messages described above that  Defendants left for Plaintiff, which message did not state at the end the address and telephone  number of the person on whose behalf the call was being transmitted.   36.  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.   37.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and Class A predominate over  questions which may affect individual members and include the following:  (a) Whether Defendants’ conduct of calling Plaintiff and the members of Class A using  the autodialer with a precorded and/or artificial message identical or substantially similar  to messages Defendants left for Plaintiff described above violated the TCPA?  (b) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class A are entitled to statutory damages from  Defendants under the TCPA?  (c)  Whether Defendants’ violations of the TCPA were willful or knowing?  (d) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class A are entitled to up to triple statutory  damages under the TCPA from Defendants for Defendants’ willful and knowing  violations of the TCPA?  (e) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class A are entitled to multiple statutory  damages (or multiple triple statutory damages for Defendants’ willful and knowing  violations of the TCPA) for each of Defendants’ calls that violated multiple portions of  the TCPA and the regulations thereunder?  11  (f) Whether Plaintiff and the members of the Class A are entitled to a permanent  injunction under the TCPA enjoining Defendants from continuing to engage in their  unlawful conduct?    38.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and Class B predominate over  questions which may affect individual members and include the following:  (a) Whether Defendants’ conduct of calling Plaintiff and the members of Class B using  the autodialer with a precorded and/or artificial message identical or substantially similar  to messages Defendants left for Plaintiff described above violated the TCPA?  (b) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to statutory damages from  Defendants under the TCPA?  (c)  Whether Defendants’ violations of the TCPA were willful or knowing?  (d) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to up to triple statutory  damages under the TCPA from Defendants for Defendants’ willful and knowing  violations of the TCPA?  (e) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to multiple statutory  damages (or multiple triple statutory damages for Defendants’ willful and knowing  violations of the TCPA) for each of Defendants’ calls that violated multiple portions of  the TCPA and the regulations thereunder?   (f) Whether Plaintiff and members of the Class B are entitled to a permanent injunction  under the TCPA enjoining Defendants from continuing to engage in their unlawful  conduct?    39.  The questions of fact and law common to Plaintiff and Class C predominate over  questions which may affect individual members and include the following:  12  (a) Whether Defendants’ conduct of calling Plaintiff and the members of Class C using  the autodialer with a prerecorded and/or artificial message identical or substantially  similar to messages Defendants left for Plaintiff described above violated GBL § 399-p?  (b) Whether Plaintiff and the members of Class C are entitled to statutory damages from  Defendants under GBL § 399-p?   (c) Whether Plaintiff and members of the Class C are entitled to a permanent injunction  under GBL § 399-p enjoining Defendants from continuing to engage in their unlawful  conduct?  (d) Whether Plaintiff and members of Class C are entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees,   costs and expenses from Defendants under GBL 399-p for this action?    40.  Adequacy of Representation:  Plaintiff is an adequate representative of the  Classes because Plaintiff’s 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 is competent and experienced in litigation in the federal courts and  class action litigation.   41.   Superiority:  A class action is superior to other available means for the fair and  efficient adjudication of the claims of the Classes. While the aggregate damages which 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. As a result, 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. Plaintiff does  not know of any other litigation concerning this controversy already commenced against  13  Defendants by any member of the Classes. The likelihood of the individual members of the  Classes prosecuting separate claims is remote. Individualized litigation would also present the  potential for varying, inconsistent or contradictory judgments, and would increase the delay and  expense to all parties and the court system resulting from multiple trials of the same factual  issues. In contrast, the conduct of this matter as a class action presents fewer management  difficulties, conserves the resources of the parties and the court system, and would protect the  rights of each member of the classes. Plaintiff knows of no difficulty to be encountered in the  management of this action that would preclude its maintenance as a class action.   42.   Injunctive Relief:  Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to  Plaintiff and members of Classes A, B and C, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief  with respect to Plaintiff and the members of Classes A, B and C as a whole.  43.  Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in all of the above  paragraphs and incorporates such allegations by reference.   44.  By Defendants’ above-described conduct,  Defendants committed more than  10,000 violations of the TCPA against Plaintiff and the members of Class A.   45.  Accordingly, Plaintiff and the members of Class A are entitled to statutory  damages from Defendants under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) of greater than $5,000,000 and an  injunction against Defendants ordering them to cease their violations of the TCPA.   46.  If it is found that Defendants willfully and/or knowingly violated the TCPA  through their calls to Plaintiff and the members of Class A, Plaintiff and the members of Class A  request an increase by the Court of the damage award against Defendants, described in the  preceding paragraph, to three times the amount available under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B), as  14  authorized by 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) for willful or knowing violations, which amounts to greater  than $15,000,000.  47.  Plaintiff repeats each and every allegation contained in all of the above  paragraphs and incorporates such allegations by reference.   48.  By Defendants’ above-described conduct, Defendants committed more than 2,500  violations of the TCPA against Plaintiff and the members of Class B.   49.  Accordingly, Plaintiff and the members of Class B are entitled to statutory  damages from Defendants under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) of greater than $1,250,000 and an  injunction against Defendants ordering Defendants to cease their violations of the TCPA.   50.  If it is found that Defendants willfully and/or knowingly violated the TCPA  through their calls to Plaintiff and the members of Class B, Plaintiff and the members of Class B  request an increase by the Court of the damage award against Defendants, described in the  preceding paragraph, 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) for willful or knowing violations, which amounts to greater  than $3,750,000.  51.  By Defendants’ above-described conduct, Defendants committed over 10,000  violations of GBL § 399-p(3) against Plaintiff and the members of Class C.   52.  Accordingly, Plaintiff and the members of Class C are entitled to statutory  damages under GBL § 399-p(9) of greater than $500,000 plus attorney’s fees, costs and expenses  incurred in bringing this action.   53.  In addition, Plaintiff and the members of Class C are entitled to an injunction  15  against Defendants ordering Defendants to cease its violations of GBL § 399-p. 