BOTTORFF et al v. ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 1of9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MICHAEL FISSLER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,
y Civil Action No. 18-3122 (CKK)

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN,
Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
May 4, 2026

1. INTRODUCTION

This Memorandum Opinion addresses the Special Master’s [51] Sealed Report and
Recommendations Regarding Damages (“Special Master’s Report”) as to damages sustained by
seven Plaintiffs.! These Plaintiffs are comprised of: (1) three servicemembers who were injured
in attacks that utilized Explosively Formed Penetrators (“EFPs”), for which Defendant Islamic
Republic of Iran (“Iran”) and its proxies bear responsibility; (2) one civilian who was injured in
an attack that utilized Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Devices (“WBIEDs”), for which Iran
and its proxies bear responsibility; and (3) three family members of servicemembers who were

killed in attacks that utilized EFPs, for which Iran and its proxies bear responsibility.” More

| A redacted version of the Special Master’s Report and Recommendations was filed at ECF No.
54. This Memorandum Opinion and Order is not being filed under seal because it does not
disclose any confidential information about the Plaintiffs.

The Special Master’s Report, ECF No. 51 addresses claims by Plaintiffs Randall Burns, Jason
Harrison, Steven Juliana, and Jonathon Schmidt and claims related to the estates of decedent
Adam Fargo (by Plaintiff Douglas Fargo) and decedent Jae Sik Moon (by Plaintiffs Young Moon
and Ki Moon).

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 2 of 9

specifically, the Special Master’s Report addresses pain and suffering damages (assault, battery,
intentional infliction of emotional distress (“iied”)) for the four injured Plaintiffs and solatium
damages by three Plaintiffs, who are close family members of the two decedents. Having
considered the Special Master’s Report — which is both thorough and well-reasoned — as well as
the Plaintiffs’ [53] Notice of Non-Objections to the Special Master’s Report and
Recommendations, the Court ADOPTS the Special Master’s recommended damages awards.

II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On July 18, 2022, Plaintiffs filed their [32] Notice of Voluntary Dismissal without
Prejudice, as to Certain Plaintiffs, and on July 20, 2022, this Court granted that dismissal.
Plaintiffs subsequently filed their [36] motion for entry of default against Defendant Iran on behalf
of the remaining Plaintiffs, and, on July 27, 2022, the Clerk’s Office entered default against
Defendant Iran. See ECF No. 38 [Clerk’s Entry of Default]. On September 26, 2022, this Court
granted Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment against Iran in favor of Plaintiffs. See Order, ECF
No. 39 (granting Plaintiffs’ [29] Motion for Default Judgment on liability and Plaintiffs’ [37]
Supplemental Motion for Default Judgment); Order, ECF No. 44 (clarifying that the default
judgment applied also in favor of Plaintiff Steven Juliana). In connection with its Order granting
default judgment, this Court issued a Memorandum Opinion, ECF No. 40, which was later
amended by Amended Memorandum Opinion, ECF No. 56, solely to add some names that had
been omitted from the conclusion section and to correct some typographical errors. The conclusion
section of the Amended Memorandum Opinion indicates that default judgment was granted against
Iran as to Plaintiffs Chase Cullen, Douglas Fargo (individually and on behalf of the estate of Adam
Fargo), Young Moon (individually and on behalf of the estate of Jae Sik Moon), Ki Moon (mother

of Jae Sik Moon), Robert Reuter, Shane Smith, Bobby Wilson, Jr., Nicholas McCoy, Michael

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 3 of 9

Fissler, Dylan Hibbert, Jason Harrison, Shaun Cook, Frieda Catherine Nicole, Joseph James III,
Randall Burns, Nicholas McCarty, Jonathon Schmidt, and Steven Juliana. Am. Mem. Op., ECF
No. 56, at 14. That Opinion highlights the findings of Plaintiffs’ two experts who discussed the
circumstances surrounding the attacks on both the decedent and injured Plaintiffs, and concluded
that Iran and its proxies were liable for the attacks. This Court’s Orders, ECF Nos. [39] and [44]
and its Memorandum Opinion, ECF No. [40], as amended by [56] encompass the liability claims
of all seven Plaintiffs addressed by the Special Master’s Report, and as such, those documents are
incorporated by reference herein.

When this Court entered its default judgment on liability, the Court made no finding
regarding damages for any of those Plaintiffs, instead “deferring calculation of damages until after
the preparation of a report by a special master.” Am. Mem. Op., ECF No. 56, at 14. Prior to the
appointment of a special master, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) issued its opinion in Borochov v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 94 F.4th 1053
(D.C. Cir. 2024), concluding that there was no subject matter jurisdiction in that case pursuant to
Section 1605A “[b]ecause the perpetrator did not kill anyone in the attack that injured the
[Plaintiffs], [and therefore] no extrajudicial killing occurred,” id. at 1060. Furthermore, the Court
opined that “Section 1605A’s test does not support expanding the material-support provision to
cover attempted but uncompleted extrajudicial killings,” id. at 1063.

In response to that Borochov ruling, and by means of an April 2, 2024 Minute Order, this
Court requested that Plaintiffs in the instant case file supplemental briefing to specify whether and
how the Court has subject matter jurisdiction, i.e., to confirm whether the attacks in this case
involve extrajudicial killings. Subsequently, on September 24, 2024, Plaintiffs confirmed that the

attacks involving Chase Cullen, Douglas Fargo (Adam Fargo, deceased), Young Moon (Jae Sik

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 4 of 9

Moon, deceased), Frieda Catherine Nicole, Randall Burns, Jonathon Schmidt, and Steven Juliana
involved extrajudicial killings and were “unaffected by the D.C. Circuit’s ruling.” Pls.’ Resp. to
the Ct’s Min. Order, ECF No. 45, at 2. On September 30, 2024, this Court entered its [47] Order
appointing Shana Solomon, Esq. as Special Master for purposes of determining damages related
to those Plaintiffs over whom there was subject matter jurisdiction. That Order of Appointment
was later amended to include the claim of Jason Harrison, who was involved in an attack in which
there was an extrajudicial killing. See Supp. Status Report in Resp. to Ct.’s Min. Order, ECF No.
49, at 2; see also Am. Order of Appt., ECF No. 50.
In connection with the appointment of a special master, this Court issued its [48] Order and
Administrative Plan, which indicated in relevant part that:
The Special Master will be guided in reviewing and evaluating damages for solatium
claims by the opinions Valore v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52 (D.D.C.
2010), Estate of Heiser v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d 229 (D.D.C. 2006),
Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 515 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2007) (“Peterson IT’),
and their progeny. In evaluating assault, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional
distress claims brought by survivors of Explosively Formed Penetrator attacks, the Special
Master shall be guided by the methodology set forth by Special Master Alan L. Balaran in
Karcher v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 16-cv-232, in his “Proposed Modification to EFP

Damages Matrix,” ECF No. 169, adopted by this Court in its Memorandum Opinion dated
June 7, 2024, ECF No. 171.

3 The Court notes that Ki Moon (mother of Jae Sik Moon, deceased) was erroneously omitted in
Plaintiffs’ [46, 49] responses to this Court’s Minute Order, which listed the Plaintiffs whose claims
could be referred to a special master for a damage determination (because they involved an
extrajudicial killing). However, like Young Moon’s damages claim, on behalf of himself and his
son Jae Sik’s Moon’s estate, Ki Moon’s damages claim is based on the attack that killed her son,
and accordingly, her claim was in fact properly considered by Special Master Solomon. The
Special Master indicated that, in her Report, she did not consider the claims of Chase Cullen or
Frieda Catherine Nicole. See Report, ECF No. 51, at 4n.1 (indicating that Plaintiffs did not include
proposed findings for Chase Cullen) and n.2 (indicating that the Special Master was informed that
Frieda Nicole’s claims were not being pursued at this time).

4

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 5of9

ECF No. 48, at 2. Special Master Shana Solomon’s Report was issued on March 23, 2026, and
Plaintiffs filed their [53] Notice of Non-objection to the Report on April 8, 2026. The Court turns
now to the Special Master’s damage calculations.

III. DISCUSSION

Asa preliminary matter, Special Master Solomon noted that this Court has jurisdiction over
Plaintiffs’ claims insofar as all the direct victims of the attacks were either “member[s] of the armed
forces” or “employees of the Government of the United States, or of an individual performing a
contract awarded by the United States Government, acting within the scope of the employee’s
employment,” and furthermore, all family member Plaintiffs are United States citizens. Special
Master’s Report, ECF No. 51, at 6-7; see 28 U.S.C. §1605A(a)(2)(A)(ii) (regarding subject matter
jurisdiction).

As noted herein, this Court has determined previously that Iran was liable for Plaintiffs’
injuries under 28 U.S.C. § 1605A(c). Pursuant to Section 1605A(c), Plaintiffs’ damages “may
include economic damages, solatium, pain and suffering, and punitive damages.” 28 U.S.C. §
1605A(c). “Under the FSIA, a ‘foreign state shall be liable in the same manner and to the same
extent as a private individual under like circumstances.’ ... Therefore, plaintiffs are entitled to the
typical array of compensatory damages that may be awarded against tortfeasors in the plaintiffs’
respective domiciliary states.” Peterson II, 515 F. Supp. 2d at 51 (quoting 28 U.S.C. §1606). In
this case, therefore, “[t]he only remaining questions, therefore, are what type of damages Plaintiffs
are entitled to recover and in what amounts.” Fritz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 324 F. Supp. 3d
54, 59 (D.D.C. 2018).

In the instant case, Plaintiffs’ claims for compensatory damages may be categorized as

follows: (1) solatium claims by Plaintiffs Adam Fargo, Young Moon, and Ki Moon; and (2) pain

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 6 of 9

and suffering claims by Plaintiffs Randall Burns, Jason Jarrison, Steven Juliana, and Jonathon
Schmidt. The Court turns now to the Special Master’s recommendations regarding Plaintiffs’ other
claims for damages.

A. Solatium Damages

A claim for solatium is “a claim for the mental anguish, bereavement and grief that those
with a close personal relationship to a decedent experience as a result of the decedent’s death, as
well as the harm caused by the loss of the decedent, society and comfort.” Belkin v. Islamic
Republic of Iran, 667 F. Supp. 2d 8, 22 (D.D.C. 2009) (citations omitted). Under the state-
sponsored terrorism exception to the FSIA, “the award of solatium damages to the close relatives
of terrorism victims” is “expressly contemplated.” Fritz, 324 F. Supp. 3d at 61-62 (citing 28 U.S.C.
§ 1605A(c)). It is presumed that “family members in direct lineal relationship suffer compensable
mental anguish[.]” Kaplan v. Hezbollah, 213 F. Supp. 3d 27, 38 (D.D.C. 2016) (internal quotation
marks omitted).

Judges in this District Court have employed “a general framework for the calculation of
proper damage awards in FSIA cases” based on principles articulated in the Heiser case. Oveissi
y, Islamic Republic of Iran, 768 F. Supp. 2d 16, 26 (D.D.C. 2011) (citing Heiser v. Republic of
Iran, 466 F. Supp. 2d at 269-270). Under this general framework, spouses of deceased victims
receive $8 million; parents and children receive $5 million; and siblings receive $2.5 million.
Peterson II, 515 F. Supp. 2d at 52; Valore, 700 F. Supp. 2d at 85; Heiser, 466 F. Supp. 2d at 269.
“Spouses typically receive greater damage awards than parents, who, in turn, receive greater
awards than siblings,” and “families of victims who have died are typically awarded greater
damages than families of victims who remain alive.” Heiser, 466 F. Supp. 2d at 269 (internal

quotation marks and citations omitted). In this case, the Special Master recommended solatium

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 7 of 9

damage awards in the amount of $5 million for Douglas Fargo, father of decedent Adam Fargo,
and $5 million each for Young Moon and Ki Moon, father and mother of decedent Jae Sik Moon.
The Special Master’s recommended solatium damage awards are adopted by this Court.

B. Damages for Pain and Suffering - Assault, Battery, and IIED

In determining damages for pain and suffering for Plaintiffs Burns, Harrison, Juliana, and
Schmidt, the Special Master employed the methodology adopted by this Court in the Karcher v,
Islamic Republic of Iran, 16-cv-232 (CKK). Under Karcher, the following methodology for
calculation of damages for pain and suffering (assault, battery, and iied) was adopted:

(1) As part of the initial calculation of an “EFP Baseline” for damages for pain and

suffering, courts may consider traditional non-EFP criteria, as set forth in the Peterson I

framework;

(2) where medically supported, courts may consider adding 25% to the EFP Baseline to
acknowledge the uniquely devastating effects of EFP-related physical injuries;

(3) where medically supported, courts may consider adding 25% to the EFP Baseline to
acknowledge the uniquely devastating effects of EFP-related psychological injuries;

(4) courts may consider adding 15% to the EFP Baseline where EFP-related injuries
required hospitalization exceeding one year; and

(5) courts may consider adding 15% to the EFP Baseline where EFP-related injuries
resulted in permanent impairment.

Special Master’s Report, ECF No. 51, at 5-6 (citing the Special Master’s Proposed Modification
to EFP Damages in Karcher, ECF No. 169, at 7-8).

In calculating damages, Special Master Solomon indicated that she reviewed and utilized
information from the Court’s Memorandum Opinion on liability as well as Plaintiffs’ declarations
and deposition testimony, and Plaintiffs’ medical (physical and psychological) records. The
Special Master discussed in detail her calculation of damages, beginning with the EFP baseline,

followed by an explanation of her application or denial of enhancements, with references to the

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 8 of 9

medical and other evidence in the record. While each of the four Plaintiffs requested pain and
suffering damages in the amount of $8,250,000.00, the Special Master recommended damages for
the four Plaintiffs, as follows: (1) Randall Burns - $7,000,000.00; (2) Jason Harrison -
$7,500,000.00; (3) Steven Juliana - $8,250,000.00; and (4) Jonathon Schmidt - $6,250,000.00.
Although the Special Master’s calculation of damage awards in three cases result in
damage amounts lower than those claimed by Plaintiffs, the Special Master explained the basis for
the variations downward from the requested amounts by referencing Plaintiffs’ medical (physical
and psychological) records. Where she found that the records did not support an enhancement,
she did not apply the enhancement. Moreover, Plaintiffs have indicated that they do not object to
any of the recommended pain and suffering damages (assault, battery, iied) for these four Plaintiffs.
As such, the Court approves the damages recommended by the Special Master for pain and

suffering (assault, battery, and iied) for Plaintiffs Burns, Harrison, Juliana, and Schmidt.

IV. CONCLUSION

The Court acknowledges Plaintiffs’ efforts to hold Iran responsible for the acts of terror
that resulted in injury and/or death to persons serving in the military and/or working for the
Government and appreciates that there is no amount of money that can truly compensate the
servicemembers/civilians and members of their family. Based on the explanation set forth herein,
the Court finds Defendant responsible for the injuries sustained by Plaintiffs and liable under the

FSIA’s state-sponsored terrorism exception for damages based on solatium and pain and suffering

Case 1:18-cv-03122-CKK Document57_ Filed 05/04/26 Page 9 of 9

(assault, battery, iied), as set forth in the Special Master’s Report. Accordingly, it is this 4th day of
May 2026,
ORDERED that the court ADOPTS the [51] Report and Recommendation by Special
Master Shana Solomon. A separate consolidated Order and Judgment will be issued subsequently.
Las Kbit

COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE