25.  Plaintiff is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a “person” as defined by 47  62.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully  stated herein.   63.  Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly  situated (hereinafter referred to as “the Class”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.   64.  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 or on behalf of Ultimate Vacation Group LLC to a cellular or residential  telephone through the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial  or prerecorded voice within the applicable statute of limitations.  Collectively, all these persons will be referred to as “Class members.” Plaintiff represents, and is  a member of, the Class.   65.  Excluded from the Class are the Defendant, and any entities in which the  Defendant has a controlling interest, the Defendant’s agents and employees, and claims for  personal injury, wrongful death and/or emotional distress.   66.  Plaintiff does not know the exact number of members in the Class, but Plaintiff  reasonably believes Class members number, at minimum, in the thousands.   67.  Plaintiff and all members of the Class have been harmed by the acts of the  Defendant.   69.  The joinder of all Class members is impracticable due to the size and relatively  modest value of each individual claim.   70.  Additionally, 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.   71.  Further, the Class can be identified easily through records maintained by Ultimate  and/or other telemarketing agents.   72.  There are well defined, nearly identical, questions of law and fact affecting all  parties.   73.  The questions of law and fact, referred to above, involving the class claims  predominate over questions which may affect individual Class members.   75.  As a person who received a non-emergency telephone call using an automatic  telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice, without providing his prior express  consent to the Defendant within the meaning of the TCPA, Plaintiff asserts claims that are typical  of each Class member who also received such phone calls.   76.  Further, Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of  the Class.   77.  Plaintiff has no interests which are antagonistic to any member of the Class.   78.  Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in handling class actions, including class  claims involving violations of the TCPA.   79.  A class action is the superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this  controversy.   80.  Class wide relief is essential to compel the Defendant to comply with the TCPA.  In  point of fact, at least one individual has filed suit against Ultimate for violating the TCPA, but the  robocalls have continued unabated.    81.  The interest of the Class members in individually pursuing claims against the  Defendant is slight because the statutory damages for an individual action are relatively small, and  are therefore not likely to deter the Defendant from engaging in the same behavior in the future.   83.  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.   84.  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.  85.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as if  fully set forth herein.   86.  The foregoing acts and omissions of the Defendant constitute 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.   87.  As a result of the Defendant’s violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et seq., Plaintiff and  Class members are entitled to an award of $500 in statutory damages for each and every call in  violation of the statute, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).   88.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to and do seek injunctive relief  prohibiting the Defendant’s violation of the TCPA in the future.   90.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully  stated herein.   91.  The foregoing acts and omissions of the Defendant constitute 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.   92.  As a result of the Defendant’s knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227  et seq., Plaintiff and each member of the Class is entitled to treble damages of up to $1,500 for  each and every call in violation of the statute, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3).   93.  Plaintiff and all Class members are also entitled to and do seek injunctive relief  prohibiting such conduct violating the TCPA by the Defendant in the future.   94.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and  costs as provided by law.  ALLEGATIONS  Plaintiff   KNOWING AND/OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER  PROTECTION ACT, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   STATUTORY VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT  47 U.S.C. §  227 ET SEQ.  