15.  At all times relevant, Plaintiff is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a  “person” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 153(39).   16.  Defendant sought to collect a debt that arose from a transaction incurred allegedly  for personal, family or household purposes.   17.  At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff’s fiancé, Aileen Luciano (“Luciano”),  had a Target-branded credit card issued by Defendant.   18.  At the time Luciano applied for the credit card from TNB, Luciano did not  provide Plaintiff’s cellular telephone number to Defendant.   19.  Plaintiff was not obligated to Defendant on Luciano’s Target credit card account.  Plaintiff and Luciano are not married, and Plaintiff was not a co-obligor or cosigner on Luciano’s  Target credit card account. Plaintiff has no contractual relationship whatsoever with Defendant  relating to Luciano’s Target credit card account.   20.  Plaintiff never provided his cellular telephone number to TD Bank or TNB.   21.  Upon information and belief, TD Bank obtained Plaintiff’s cellular telephone  number through skip-tracing.   22.  Plaintiff never provided TD Bank or TNB with express consent to receive  prerecorded or automated calls on Plaintiff’s cellular telephone.    23.  Plaintiff did not provide his cellular telephone number to TD Bank “during the  transaction that resulted in the debt owed.”   25.  TD Bank and/or TNB called Plaintiff’s cellular phone approximately once per  day, seven days a week, between April 2014 and late August 2014. The exact number of calls  can be determined from Plaintiff’s cellular phone bills and from Defendant’s records.   26.  Defendant’s calls were made from numbers with Minnesota and California area  codes, as well as 1-800 prefixes.   27.  Each time Defendant called Plaintiff’s cellular telephone and Plaintiff answered  the call, there was silence on the line until Plaintiff spoke or made a sound into the phone. The  initial silence indicates that a computer-controlled, automated telephone dialing system was  initiating the calls and routing them to a live operator or automated message only after the  system identified a voice or other sound on the line.   28.  Defendant is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a “person,” as defined by 47  U.S.C. § 153(39) (“The term ‘person’ includes an individual, partnership, association, joint-stock  company, trust, or corporation.”)   29.  All telephone contact by Defendant to Plaintiff on his cellular telephone occurred  via an “automatic telephone dialing system,” as defined by 47 U.S.C. § 227(a)(1), and/or used  “an artificial or prerecorded voice” as described in 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A).    30.  The telephone number that Defendant used to contact Plaintiff, with an “artificial  or prerecorded voice” and/or made by an “automatic telephone dialing system,” was assigned to  a cellular telephone service as specified in 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii).   32.  Defendant’s telephone calls to Plaintiff’s cellular phone were not “for emergency  purposes” as described in 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A).    33.  Defendant’s telephone calls to Plaintiff’s cellular phone utilizing an “artificial or  prerecorded voice” or placed by an “automatic telephone dialing system” for non-emergency  purposes and in the absence of Plaintiff’s prior express consent violated 47 U.S.C. §  227(b)(1)(A).   33.   Plaintiff has retained counsel experienced in handling class action claims  involving violations of federal and state consumer protection statutes, including claims under the  34.  Under the TCPA and pursuant to the FCC’s January 2008 Declaratory Ruling, the  burden is on Defendant to demonstrate that Plaintiff provided his prior express consent within  the meaning of the statute.  35.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as  if fully stated herein.   36.   The foregoing acts and omissions of TD Bank 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.    37.  As a result of TD Bank’s knowing and/or willful violations of 47 U.S.C. § 227 et  seq., Plaintiff and each member 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).   39.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as  if fully set forth herein.    40.  The foregoing acts and omissions of TD Bank 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.   41.  As a result of TD Bank’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).   42.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to and do seek injunctive relief  prohibiting TD Bank’s violation of the TCPA in the future.    43.  Plaintiff and Class members are also entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees and  costs.  44.  Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and on behalf of all other persons  similarly situated.   46.  Plaintiff does not know the exact number of members in the Class, but Plaintiff  reasonably believes that Class members number at minimum in the hundreds.   47.   Plaintiff and all members of the Class have been harmed by the acts of TD Bank.    48.  This Class Action Complaint seeks injunctive relief and money damages.   49.  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 TD Bank and/or its  agents.    51.  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 which are  antagonistic to any member of the Class.    KNOWING AND/OR WILLFUL VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER  PROTECTION ACT, 47 U.S.C. § 227 ET SEQ.   VIOLATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 47 U.S.C. §  227 ET SEQ.  