IS 44 (Rev. 12i12) Case gi??W/lO/B Page 1 of 9 The .18 44 civil cover sheet and the information coutained herein neither replace nor supplement the lilin 1 provided by local rules of court, This form. approved by the JudICIal Couference ofthe United States In purpose ofinitiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS PURM.) and service of pleadings or other papers as required by Iang except as ?eptember 1974, 15 required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the I. PLAINTIFFS KIA ELDER County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff PHILADELPHIA US. PLAINTIFF CASES) (C) Attorneys Firm Name. Address, and 'f?ei?epi?ionc Number) CRAIG THOR KIMMEL, KIMMEL SILVERMAN, PC. 30 EAST BUTLER PIKE, AMBLER, PA 19002 PHONE: (215) 540-8888 EXT. 116 DEFENDANTS NOTE: Attorneys (H'Knmm) COMCAST CORPORATION County of Residence of First Listed Defendant (IN US. PLAINTIFF IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED. (Place (it? in ()ne Bar Only PRI (Piece (Iii One (For Diversity Cores Only) and One Box?n' De?endrini) CI 1 US. Government E3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF Plaintiff (US. Government Not a Party Citizen oI'This State I Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4 of Business In This State U2 US. Government I3 4 Diversity Citizen ofAnother State 2 2 Incomorated and Principal Place 5 5 Defendant (?nite-ate Citizenship of Parties in Item of Business In Another State Citizen or Subject ofa 3 3 Foreign Nation CI 6 6 Foreign Country (Place an in One Box Only) I CONTRACT TORTS BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES I 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY D625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 3?5 False Claims Act 120 Marine 310 Airplane El 365 Personal Injury - ofl?roperty 21 USC 881 El 423 Withdrawal 400 State Reapportionment 130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability CI 690 Other 28 USC 410 Antitrust 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 I-lealth Carer 430 Banks and Banking CI 150 Recovery of Overpayment El 320 Assault. Libel Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 450 Commerce Enforcement ofJudgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 460 Deportation 15] Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers? Product Liability 830 Patent 470 Racketeer Influenced and 152 Recoveiy of Defaulted Liability CI 368 Asbestos Personal 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations Student Loans El 340 Marine Injury Product 480 Consumer Credit (Excludes Veterans) El 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 490 Cable/Sat TV I: 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395 ft) El 850 Securities/Commodities! of Veteran?s Bene?ts El 350 Motor Vehicle El 370 Other Fraud Act 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange 160 Stockholders? Suits CI 355 Motor Vehicle El 3'31 Truth in Lending D720 LaboriManagement 863 DIWCKDIWW (405(g)) 890 Other Statutory Actions 190 Other Contract Product Liability [3 380 Other Personal Relations El 864 SSID Title XVI 891 Agricultural Acts 195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage El 740 Railway Labor Act 865 (405(g)) El 893 Enviromnental Matters 196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage El 751 Family and Medical 895 Freedom of Information 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act Act Medical Malpractice REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 210 Land Condemnation El 220 Foreclosure El 230 Rent Lease Ejeetment 240 Torts to Land 245 Tort Product Liability 290 All Other Real Property 440 Other Civil Rights 441 Voting 442 Employment El 443 Housing! Accommodations 445 Amer. vii/Disabilities Employment 446 Amer, xvi/Disabilities Other 448 Education I-Iabcas Corpus: 463 Alien Detainee 510 Motions to Vacate Sentence 530 General T90 Other Labor Litigation T91 Employee Retirement Income Security Act [3 896 Arbitration FEDERAL TAX SUITS 899 Administrative Procedure 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION Other: 540 Mandamus Other 550 Civil Rights 555 Prison Condition 560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement 462 Naturalization Application 465 Other Immigration Actions 870 Taxes (us. Plaintiff or Defendant) IRS?Third Party 26 USC 7609 Acti'Review or Appeal of Agency Decision El 950 Constitutionality of State Statutes V. (Place on in One Box Only) 1 Original Proceeding VI. CAUSE OF ACTION IJ 2 Removed from State Court Appellat 47 U.S.C. {$227 et seq. Brief description of cause: I_l 3 Remanded from U4 Coun TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT Reinstated or ReOpened ripen-ma Cite the US. Civil Statute under which yeti are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity): LJ 5 Transferred from I_l 6 Multidistrict Another District Litigation VII, REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS Is A CLASS ACTION DEMAND CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, JURY DEMAND [Eves No RELATED I I f! IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER DATE SIGNATURE or OF 07nox2015 FOR OFFICE use ONLY 1? RECEIPT it AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 2 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF DESIGNATION FORM to be used by counsel to indicate the category of the ease for the purpose of assignment to appropriate calendar. Addressofi?laintiff: 1415 Fairmont Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19130 AddressofDefendant: One Comcast Center, Philadelphia, PA 19103 Place ot?Accident, Incident or Transaction: (Use Reverse Side For Additional Space] Does this civil action involve a nongovemmental corporate pany with any parent corporation and any publicly held corporation owning 10% or more of its stock? (Attach two copies ofthe Disclosure Statement Form in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 7. 1 (al) Yesl:I No? Does this case involve multidistrict litigation possibilities? YesD No? RELATED CASE, IFANY: Case Number: Judge Date Terminated: Civil cases are deenred related when yes is answered to any of the following questions: l. Is this case related to property included in an earlier numbered suit pending or within one year previously terminated action in this court? YesD 2. Does this case involve the same issue of fact or grow out of the same transaction as a prior suit pending or within one year previously terminated action in this court? YesEl Nol? 3. Does this case involve the validity or infringement ofa patent already in suit or any earlier numbered case pending or within one year previously terminated action in this court? YesEl Nol? 4. Is this case a second or successive liabeas corpus, social security appeal, or pro se civil rights case ?led by the same individual? YesD Neg crer: (Place in one CATEGORY ONLY) A. Federal Question Cases: B. Dit-?Gm?ft?y Jurisdiction Cases: 1. El Indemnity Contract, Marine Contract, and All Other Contracts I Insurance Contract and Other Contracts 2. FELA 2. El Airplane Personal Injury 3. Jones Act-Personal Injury 3. CI AsSault, Defamation 4. El Antitrust 4. El Marine Personal Injury 5. E1 Patent 5. El Motor Vehicle Personal Injury 6. Labor-Management Relations 6. Other Personal Injury [Please specify) 7. E1 Civil Rights 7. El Products Liability 8. E1 Habeas Corpus 8. El Products Liability? Asbestos 9. Securities Act(s) Cases 9. All other Diversity Cases 10. Social Security Review Cases (Please specify) 11. it All other Federal Question Cases [Phasespecj?a U. . C. ARBITRATION CERTIFICATION {Check Appropriate Category} I, CRAIG THOR KIMMEL ,counscl ofr ?ord do hereby certify: El Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 53.2, Section that to the bestji?my knowledge and belief, the damages recoverable in this civil action case exceed the sum of $150,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs; El Relief other than monetary damages is sought. 57100 Attorney-id-Law Attorney NOTE: A trial de novo will be a trial byjur'y only iftlrere has been compliance with F.R.C.P. 38. I certify that, to my knowledge, the within case is not related to any/cage now pending or within one year previously terminated action in this court except as noted above. I. 57100 DATE: Q2 5 [thwart-Tani Attorney CW. 609 ($2012) Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 3 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CASE MANAGEMENT TRACK DESIGNATION FORM CIVIL ACTION KIA ELDER v. COMCAST CORPORATION NO. In accordance with the Civil Justice Expense and Delay Reduction Plan of this court, counsel for plaintiff shall complete a Case Management Track Designation Form in all civil cases at the time of filing the complaint and serve a copy on all defendants. (See 1:03 ofthe plan set forth on the reverse side of this form.) In the event that a defendant does not agree with the plaintiff regarding said designation, that defendant shall, with its first appearance, submit to the clerk of court and serve on the plaintiff and all other parties, a Case Management Track Designation Form specifying the track to which that defendant believes the case should be assigned. SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CASE MANAGEMENT TRACKS: Habeas Corpus Cases brought under 28 U.S.C. 2241 through 2255. Social Security Cases requesting review ofa decision ofthe Secretary of Health and Human Services denying plaintiff Social Security Benefits. Arbitration Cases required to be designated for arbitration under Local Civil Rule 53.2. (K) Asbestos Cases involving claims for personal injury or property damage from exposure to asbestos. Special Management Cases that do not fall into tracks through that are commonly referred to as complex and that need special or intense management by the court. (See reverse side ofthis form for a detailed explanation of special management cases.) Standard Management Cases that do riot fall into any one of the other tracks. ,i 07?10?15 Plaintiff, Kia Elder Date Attorn?cy-at?law Attorney for 215?540?8888 116 877?788?2864 kimmel?creditlaw.com T?elephone FAX Number E-Mail Address (Civ. 660) 10:02 Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 4 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF KIA ELDER, Plaintiff Case No.: V. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR COMCAST CORPORATION, JURY TRIAL Defendant (Telephone Consumer Protection 1 Act) COMPLAINT KIA ELDER (?Plaintiff?), by and through her attorneys, KIMMEL SILVERMAN, P.C., alleges the following against COMCAST CORPORATION (?Defendant?): INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiff?s Complaint is based on the Telephone Consumer Protection Act 47 U.S.C. 227 (21? sec]. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. Jurisdiction of this Court arises pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331. See Mims V. Arrow Fin. Services, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 740, 747, 1.81. L. Ed. 2d 881 (2012). 3. Defendant conducts business in the Commonwealth of and as such, personal jurisdiction is established. 1 COMPLAINT Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 5 of 9 4. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 .S.C. 1391(b)(2). PARTIES 5. Plaintiff is a natural person residing in Philadelphia, 19130. 6. Plaintiff is a ?person? as that term is de?ned by 47 U.S.C. 153(39). 7. Defendant is a corporation with its headquarters located at One Comcast Center, Philadelphia, 19103. 8. Defendant is a ?person? as that term is defined by 47 U.S.C. ?153(39). 9. Defendant acted through its agents, employees, of?cers, members, directors, heirs, successors, assigns, principals, trustees, sureties, subrogees, representatives, and insurers. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 10. Plaintiff has a cellular telephone number that she has had for more than one year. 11. Plaintiff has only used this number as a cellular telephone number. 12. The phone number has been assigned to a cellular telephone service for which Plaintiff incurs a charge for incoming calls. 13. Beginning in late September 2014, and continuing through June 2015, Defendant repeatedly called Plaintiff on her cellular telephone. 2 COMPLAINT Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 6 of 9 14. When contacting Plaintiff on her cellular telephone, Defendant used an automatic telephone dialing system and automated and/or pre-recorded messages. 15. Defendant?s automated messages stated: ?We?re calling from Comcast,? before the call would be transferred to a live representative. 16. Defendant?s telephone calls were not made for ?emergency purposes.? 17. In late September 2014, Plaintiff spoke with a male collector of Defendant who informed Plaintiff he was calling to collect on a $527.00 cable television bill. 18. Plaintiff informed Defendant that she had paid that debt in 2011 and told the collector that she wanted Comcast to stop calling her on her cellular telephone. 19. Defendant acknowledged Plaintiff instructions to stop calling her cellular telephone but the calls did not stop. 20. Defendant continued to call Plaintiff on her cellular telephone, and at this point it was entirely without her express prior consent. 21. From late September 2014, Defendant placed cellular calls to Plaintiff an average of once or twice each day. 22. Calls continued at least through June 18, 2015. 3 PLAINTIFF COMPLAINT Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 7 of 9 23. None of the phone calls were made for ?emergency purposes.? DEFENDANT VIOLATED THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 24. Plaintiff incorporates the forgoing paragraphs as though the same were set forth at length herein. 25. Defendant initiated multiple automated telephone calls to Plaintiff? cellular telephone using a prerecorded voice and without her express prior consent. 26. Defendant initiated these automated calls to Plaintiff using an automatic telephone dialing system. 27. Defendant?s calls to Plaintiff were not made for emergency purposes. 28. Defendant?s calls to Plaintiff, in and after September 2014, were not made with Plaintiff? prior express consent. 29. Defendant?s acts as described above were done with malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, wanton and negligent disregard for Plaintiff?s rights under the law and with the purpose of harassing Plaintiff. 30. The acts and/or omissions of Defendant were done unfairly, unlawfully, intentionally, deceptively and fraudulently and absent bona ?de error, lawful right, legal defense, legal justification or legal excuse. 31. As a result of the above violations of the TCPA, Plaintiff has suffered the losses and damages as set forth above entitling Plaintiff to an award of statutory, actual and trebles damages. 4 COMPLAINT Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 8 of 9 PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, KIA ELDER, respectfully prays for a judgment as follows: a. All actual damages suffered pursuant to 47 U.S.C. b. Statutory damages of $500.00 per violative telephone call pursuant to 47 U.S.C. c. Treble damages of $1,500.00 per Violative telephone call pursuant to 47 U.S.C. d. Injunctiye relief pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 227(b)(3); and e. Any other relief deemed. appropriate by this Honorable Court. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff KIA ELDER, demands a jury trial in this case. 5 PLAINTIFF COMPLAINT Case Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 9 of 9 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DATEDzl-ffm 1 SILVERMAN, P.C. By: CRAIG THOR KIMMEL Attorney ID 57100 Kimmel Silverman, PC. 30 E. Butler Pike Ambler, PA 19002 Phone: (215) 540?8888 Fax: (877) 788-2864 Email: kimmel@creditlaw.com 6 COMPLAINT