23.  On or about June 12, 2020, Defendant sent an automated unsolicited marketing text  message to Plaintiff Brooks’ cellular telephone number from the telephone number (206) 775- 7325.     24.  Then, on June 14, 2020, Defendant sent a second automated unsolicited marketing  text message to Plaintiff Brooks’ cellular telephone number from the telephone number (206) 775- 7325.     26.  Defendant sells and promotes its products at this website.   27.  Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant’s initial text messages.   28.  Nonetheless, Defendant sent two additional text messages to Plaintiff Brooks’  cellular telephone number on July 18, 2020 and July 19, 2020 from a different telephone number:  (213) 414-7549.   30.  The  links  embedded  in  these  text  messages  are  https://curaleaf.com/locations/#new-york;  https://hqui.us/gG02oEgM2vX3;  and  https://ccop.us/gG02a892Z9z4.    31.  Each  of  these  links  redirect  to  Defendant’s  website  (https://website.curaleaftest.com/locations/#new-york)   32.  Defendant sells and promotes its products at this website.   33.  Plaintiff did not give Defendant prior express written consent to send text messages  to her cellular telephone numbers by using an automatic telephone dialing system.    34.  The text messages Defendant sent to Plaintiff consisted of pre-written templates of  impersonal text and were identical to text messages Defendant sent to other consumers.   35.  Upon information and good faith belief, the language in the messages was  automatically generated and inputted into pre-written text templates without individualized human  intervention in the drafting or sending of the messages.   36.  Upon information and belief, Defendant sent identical text messages to thousands  of other consumers.   37.  The telephone system Defendant used to send the message constitutes an ATDS as  defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1).   38.  The text messages at issue are standardized, impersonal, and consistent in structure  and format.   40.  Upon information and belief, no human directed any single text message to  Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number.   41.  Upon information and belief the hardware and software combination utilized by  Defendant has the capacity to store and dial sequentially generated numbers, randomly generated  numbers, or numbers from a database of numbers.   42.  Defendant did not have Plaintiff’s prior express consent to place automated text  messages to Plaintiff on her cellular telephones.   43.  Receipt of Defendant’s unauthorized messages drained Plaintiff’s phone batteries  and caused Plaintiff additional electricity expenses and wear and tear on her phone and battery.   44.  Defendant did not place the text message for an emergency purpose.   45.  Through the aforementioned conduct, Defendant violated 47 U.S.C. §  227(b)(1)(A)(iii).  56.  Plaintiff brings this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, and as  representatives of the following class:  All persons throughout the United States (1) to whom Defendant  delivered, or caused to be delivered, a text message, (2) directed to  a number assigned to a cellular telephone service, (3) by using an  automatic telephone dialing system, (4) within four years preceding  the date of this complaint through the date of class certification.   57.  Excluded from the class are Defendant, its officers and directors, members of their  immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, and any entity in  which Defendant have or had a controlling interest.   59.  The exact number of the members of the class is unknown to Plaintiff at this time,  and can (and will) be determined through appropriate discovery.    60.  On information and belief, Defendant texted thousands of class members  nationwide during the class period.   61.  Accordingly, it is reasonable to infer members of the class are so numerous that  joinder of all members is impracticable.    62.  The disposition of the claims in a class action will provide substantial benefits to  the parties and the Court.  Ascertainability   63.  The members of the class are ascertainable because the class is defined by reference  to objective criteria.    64.  In addition, the members of the class are identifiable in that, upon information and  belief, their cellular telephone numbers, names and addresses can be identified in business records  maintained by Defendant and by third parties.   Typicality    65.  Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the members of the class.    66.  Plaintiff has had to suffer the burden of receiving text messages to her cellular  telephone from an ATDS.    67.  Thus, her injuries are typical to class members.    68.  Defendant used an ATDS to deliver text messages to Plaintiff’s cellular telephone  number in a similar manner as it did to all members of the class.   70.  Plaintiff’s claims are based on the same theories, as are the claims of the members  of the class.   71.  Defendant harmed Plaintiff and class members by illegally texting their cellular  phones using an ATDS.    72.  Plaintiff and the class were damaged thereby.   Adequacy    73.  Plaintiff is qualified to and will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the  members of the class with whom she is similarly situated.    74.  Plaintiff acknowledges that she has an obligation to make known to the Court any  relationships, conflicts, or differences with any class member.    75.  Plaintiff’s interests in this matter are not directly or irrevocably antagonistic to the  interests of the members of the class.    76.  Plaintiff will vigorously pursue the claims of the members of the class.   77.  Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced and competent in class action litigation.   78.  Plaintiff’s attorneys, the proposed class counsel, are versed in the rules governing  class action discovery, certification, and settlement.    79.  In addition, the proposed class counsel is experienced in handling clams involving  consumer actions and violations of the TCPA.   80.  Plaintiff’s counsel will vigorously pursue this matter.   81.  Plaintiff’s counsel will assert, protect and otherwise represent the members of the  class.   83.  The questions of law and fact common to the members of the class predominate  over questions that may affect individual members of the class.    84.  The elements of the legal claims brought by Plaintiff and class members are capable  of proof at trial through evidence that is common to the class rather than individual to its members.  Commonality   85.  There are common questions of law and fact as to all members of the class,  including but not limited to:  a.   Defendant’s conduct, pattern, and practice as it pertains to delivering  advertisement and telemarketing text messages;  b.   Whether, within the statutory period, Defendant used an ATDS as defined  by the TCPA to send text messages to class members;  c.   Whether Defendant’s conduct violated the TCPA;   d.  Whether Defendant should be enjoined from engaging in such conduct in  the future; and  e.   The availability of statutory penalties.  Superiority:    86.  A class action is superior to all other available methods for the fair and efficient  adjudication of this matter.   88.  The pursuit of separate actions by individual members of the class would, as a  practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of other members of the class, and could  substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.   89.  The pursuit of separate actions by individual members of the class could create a  risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications, which might establish incompatible standards of  conduct for Defendant.   90.  These varying adjudications and incompatible standards of conduct, in connection  with presentation of the same essential facts, proof, and legal theories, could also create and allow  the existence of inconsistent and incompatible rights within the class.   91.  The damages suffered by each individual member of the class may be relatively  modest, thus, the expense and burden to litigate each of their claims individually make it difficult  for the members of the class to redress the wrongs done to them.    92.  Absent a class action, most class members would likely find the cost of litigating  their claims prohibitively high and would therefore have no effective remedy at law.   93.  The pursuit of Plaintiff’s claims, and the claims of the members of the class, in one  forum will achieve efficiency and promote judicial economy.   94.  There will be little difficulty in the management of this action as a class action.   95.  Defendant has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the  members of the class, making final declaratory or injunctive relief appropriate.   96.  Plaintiff and the class members have all suffered and will continue to suffer harm  and damages as a result of Defendant’s unlawful conduct.   98.  Plaintiff incorporates all preceding factual allegations as if fully restated herein.   Violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act  47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii)  (On behalf of Plaintiff and the TCPA Class)  