UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TAYLOR FORCE, et al., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 16-1468 (RDM) THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, et al., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This civil action for compensatory and punitive damages arises under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1605A. The fifty- seven plaintiffs are the victims of seven separate terrorist attacks that took place in Israel between March 6, 2008 and March 8, 2016, and their family members. Most of the plaintiffs are U.S. citizens (including dual U.S.-Israeli nationals), although some are not. Defendants include the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Iranian Ministry of Information and Security (“MOIS”), and the Syrian Arab Republic. Plaintiffs assert that their injuries were caused by Iran and Syria’s provision of material support to two terrorist organizations—Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (“PIJ”). To establish subject-matter jurisdiction, Plaintiffs invoke the state-sponsored terrorism exception to the FSIA, 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(a). The forty-four U.S.-citizen plaintiffs, see Dkt. 87 at 41, also rely on another provision of the statute to supply a federal cause of action: They argue that Iran and Syria violated § 1605A(c) by providing “material support” to Hamas and PIJ, which, in turn, engaged in the extrajudicial killing (or attempted extrajudicial killing) of U.S. nationals in the seven attacks at issue. Dkt. 1 at 28–31 (Compl. ¶¶ 116–31). Plaintiffs also assert claims for negligence and aiding and abetting under Israeli law. Id. at 31–34 (Compl. ¶¶ 132– 51). None of the Defendants has answered or otherwise appeared in this action. Consequently, at Plaintiffs’ request, the Clerk of the Court entered defaults against all three Defendants. Dkt. 23; Dkt. 24. Plaintiffs subsequently moved for the entry of a default judgments against the Islamic Republic of Iran, MOIS, and the Syrian Arab Republic, Dkt. 91, and for the appointment of a special master to conduct damages proceedings, Dkt. 85 at 1, 21–22. As explained below, the U.S. national plaintiffs, with the exception of the Parnases, have established their right to relief against Iran, but not Syria, under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(a). The Court further concludes that the non-U.S.-citizen plaintiffs—with the exception of M.H.B and Y.A.L.B., who were born after the attack that injured their father—are entitled to recover under the law of Israel for negligence and aiding and abetting. The Court will, accordingly, DENY the motion for entry of default judgment as to all claims by the Parnases without prejudice. The Court will also DENY the motion for entry of default judgment as to all claims by M.H.B. and Y.A.L.B., who are represented by their parents, Schmuel and Nechama Brauner, without prejudice. As to the remaining fifty-one Plaintiffs, the Court will GRANT the motion as to their claims against the Syrian Arab Republic, the Islamic Republic of Iran and MOIS, see 28 U.S.C. § 1608(e), and will APPOINT a special master to hear their damages claims and to report to the Court recommending the appropriate award as to those plaintiffs. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals