an area of regulation in which the responsibility of policing falls principally on the shoulders of the private citizen and private counsel.”). Here, class action is superior to individual lawsuits. Over the relevant time period at Defendant’s ATM machines, there were 46,469 total unique cards used to perform over 127,000 transactions. (Def. Resp. Ex. F-Zerdlow Aff. ¶ 15.) Most members of the class are likely not aware of the technical violation of the statute. The likelihood that many members of the class will choose to bring individual lawsuits is remote. III. Identifiability of Class Members Members of the class must be identifiable. Courts sometimes address this concern when determining whether the class can be defined. See Oshana v. Coca-Cola Co., 472 F.3d 506, 513 (7th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>) (citation omitted). Other courts address this
holding that to maintain a class action the existence of the class must be pleaded and the limits of the class must be defined with some specificity holding that rule 23a requirements must be satisfied as if class were to litigate its claims recognizing that the number of class representatives is not significant under rule 23a holding in addition to the requirements in 23a and 23b the plaintiff must also show  that the class is indeed identifiable as a class holding that the filing of a class action by a class representative without standing tolls the period of limitations with regard to all asserted members of the class and that the amendment of the complaint by the addition of a class member with standing relates back to the original complaint