(Willful and Knowing Violation of 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. – Telephone Consumer  Protection Act)  (on behalf of Plaintiff and the Class)     In early 2018, Nelly Garcia provided her cellular telephone number to Fashion  Nova when she purchased clothing items at its website.    On or about June 20, 2018 at approximately 6:06 p.m. Central Standard Time  (CST), Ms. Garcia received the following text message from Fashion Nova at her cellular  telephone number ending in “-5462”:    None of the above-described text messages addressed her by name.     Ms. Garcia has never provided her consent, orally or in writing, to receive text  advertisements from Fashion Nova on her cellular phone.     Class members received the same or similar unsolicited text advertisements.    Defendant did not obtain prior express written consent from Plaintiff or Class  members to send the above-described text messages to their cellular telephones.     Plaintiff and Class members suffered injuries in the form of invasion of privacy,  aggravation, and nuisance.    The text messages alleged herein were exclusively made by, or on behalf of  Defendant.     Defendant was and is aware that it was making the above-described text message  calls on a widespread basis to consumers who had not provided prior express written consent to  receive them/   Numerosity: The exact number of Class members is unknown and not available to  Plaintiff at this time, but it is clear that individual joinder is impracticable. On information and  belief, Defendant has sent text messages to thousands of consumers who fall into the definition of  the Class. Class members can be identified through Defendant’s records.    Typicality: Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of other members of the  Class in that Plaintiff and the Class members sustained damages arising out of Defendant’s  uniform wrongful conduct and unsolicited text message calls.    Adequate Representation: Plaintiff will fairly and adequately represent and  protect the interests of the Class, and has retained counsel competent and experienced in complex  litigation and class actions. Plaintiff’s claims are representative of the claims of the other members  of the Class. That is, Plaintiff and the Class members sustained damages as a result of Defendant’s  conduct and received substantially the same text messages. Plaintiff also has no interests  antagonistic to those of the Class, and Defendant has no defenses unique to Plaintiff. Plaintiff and  her counsel are committed to vigorously prosecuting this action on behalf of the members of the  Class, and have the financial resources to do so. Neither Plaintiff nor his counsel has any interest  adverse to the Class.    Plaintiff reserves the right to revise the foregoing "Class Allegations" and "Class  Definition" based on facts learned through additional investigation and in discovery.   Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully set forth herein.    Defendant made unwanted, unsolicited text message advertisements to Plaintiff and  the Class members’ cellular telephones without their prior express written consent.    Defendant sent these text messages to Plaintiff and the Class' cellular telephone  numbers using equipment with the ability to store or produce cellular telephone numbers to be  called using a random or sequential number generator and to dial such numbers without human  intervention.     The equipment used by Defendant to send text messages to Plaintiff and Class’  cellular telephone numbers qualifies as an ATDS as defined by 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(f)(2) and 47  U.S.C. § 227(a)(1).     As a result of Defendant’s unlawful conduct, Plaintiff and the members of the  putative Class suffered actual damages and also have had their rights to privacy adversely  impacted. Plaintiff and the Class are therefore entitled to, among other things, a minimum of $500  in statutory damages for each such violation under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(B).    Because Defendant’s misconduct was willful and knowing, the Court should,  pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3), treble the amount of statutory damages recoverable by the  Plaintiff and the other members of the putative Class.     Alternatively, because Defendant’s misconduct was negligent, the Court should,  pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3), award statutory damages recoverable by Plaintiff and the other  members of the putative Class.     Additionally, as a result of Defendant’s unlawful conduct, Plaintiff and the other  members of the Class are entitled to an injunction under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3)(A) and §  227(c)(5)(A) to ensure that Defendant’s violations of the TCPA do not continue into the future. 