Karcher v. Islamic Republic of Iran

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: January 23, 2026
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2016-0232
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

TIMOTHY KARCHER, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 16-00232 (CKK) V. Public Redacted Version ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN, Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

This Memorandum Opinion addresses the Special Master's [287] Sealed Report and

Recommendation Regarding Damages as to solatium claims by Plaintiffs Aliciah Fuller and Daniel

J. Fuentes. 1 These Plaintiffs are family members of Plaintiffs Alexander Fuller and Daniel A.

Fuentes, who were killed in attacks on January 25, 2007, and April 6, 2007, respectively, where

both attacks utilized Explosively Formed Penetrators ("EFPs"), for which Defendant Islamic

Republic of Iran ("Iran") and its proxies bear responsibility. See Karcher v. Islamic Republic of

Iran , Civil Action No. 16-232, 2021 WL 133507 (Jan. 14, 2021) (discussing in detail the

circumstances surrounding the attacks, including the attack which killed Alexander Fuller and

Daniel A. Fuentes, among others). That opinion is incorporated by reference herein. The Special

Master's Report and Recommendation addresses only solatium damages. Having considered the

Report and Recommendation of the Special Master - which is thoughtful and supported by

citations to the record evidence - as well as the Plaintiffs' [289] Notice of Non-Objections to the

1 A redacted version of the Report and Recommendation was filed by Plaintiffs at ECF No. 291 . This Memorandum Opinion and Order is being filed under seal as it discloses confidential information.

1 Special Master's Report and Recommendation, the Court ADOPTS the Special Master's

recommended damages awards. A separate consolidated Order and Judgment will be issued

subsequently.

II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

After holding a three-day bench trial, on August 26, 2019, the Court granted default

judgment against Iran as to the claims of multiple Plaintiffs injured in bellwether attacks and the

claims of Plaintiffs representing individuals killed in the bellwether attacks. See Orders, ECF Nos.

93 & 105; see Aug. 26, 2019 Mem. Op., ECF No. 94 and Sept. 11, 2019 Mem. Op., ECF No. 106

(incorporated by reference herein). The Court made no finding regarding damages for any of those

bellwether Plaintiffs but instead appointed Alan Balaran, Esq. as a Special Master to prepare

reports and recommendations on damages for these Plaintiffs. See Sept. 9, 2019 Order and Admin.

Plan, ECF No. 102. Before the Special Master's reports and recommendations had been

completed, the Court ordered Mr. Balaran to include his findings on non-economic damages for

eight non-bellwether Plaintiffs who were injured in EFP attacks for which the Court subsequently

found Iran liable. See Jan. 14, 2021 Order, ECF No. 125; see also Jan. 14, 2021 Order granting

default judgment; Jan. 14, 2021 Sealed Mem. Op. (incorporated by reference herein) (addressing

73 non-bellwether attacks).

Mr. Balaran's reports and recommendations were filed under seal, ECF Nos. 146-148, and

after an objection by the Plaintiffs - regarding the methodology employed to calculate EFP

damages - the Special Master revised his EFP Damages Matrix, see ECF No. 169 (proposed

modification). Plaintiffs filed their [170] Notice of Non-Objection to the Proposed Modification,

and the Court issued its [171] Memorandum Opinion adopting the analysis and revised damages

calculations. Thereafter, this Court appointed four additional Special Masters "to administer

2 damages proceedings for the Plaintiffs in this case [who were] awarded default judgment, [but]

who were not part of this Court's remit to Mr. Alan L. Balaran." Oct. 3, 2024 Order and Admin.

Plan, ECF No. 179, at 1. The four Special Masters were directed to provide their Reports and

Recommendations on a rolling basis. Id. at 3. Special Master Jack McKay's Report and

Recommendation - which is the subject of this Memorandum Opinion and Order - addresses

solatium claims made by family members of Alexander Fuller and Daniel A. Fuentes.

III. DISCUSSION

As a preliminary matter, Special Master McKay noted that this Court has jurisdiction over

Plaintiffs' claims insofar as both Mr. Fuller and Mr. Fuentes were "member[s] of the armed forces"

and "both of the family member Plaintiffs are United States citizens." Report and

Recommendation, ECF No. 287, at 6; 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). In the instant case, Plaintiffs claim solatium damages and punitive damages.

The issue of punitive damages was not referred to the Special Master; rather, Plaintiffs have

requested punitive damages in their [8] Amended Complaint and through their [191] Motion in

Support of Punitive Damages, which was granted by this Court. See Memorandum Opinion, ECF

No. 196 (incorporated by reference herein) (awarding punitive damages, which are to be computed

by multiplying each Plaintiff's compensatory damages by three). Accordingly, punitive damages

for the Plaintiffs addressed in this Opinion and Order will be calculated subsequently, in a manner

consistent with this Court's Memorandum Opinion, ECF No. 196. The Court turns now to the

Special Master's recommendations regarding Plaintiffs' solatium claims.

3 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, 667 F. Supp. 2d

at 22 (citation 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).

Courts in this District have employed "a general framework for the calculation of proper

damage awards in FSIA cases" based on principles articulated in the Heiser case. Oveissi v. 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 v.

Islamic Republic of Iran ("Peterson IF'), 515 F. Supp. 2d 25, 52 (D.D.C. 2007); Valore v. Islamic

Republic ofIran, 700 F. Supp. 2d 52, 85 (D.D.C. 201 0); Heiser v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 466 F.

Supp. 2d 229,269 (D.D.C. 2006). "Spouses typically receive greater damage awards than parents,

who, in tum, 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 omitted).

Accordingly, in this District, the baseline solatium awards for family members of victims

who survived terrorist attacks are that spouses receive $4 million, parents and children receive

$2.5 million, and siblings receive $1.25 million. Peterson v. Islamic Republic ofIran, 515 F. Supp.

4 2d 25, 52 (D.D.C. 2007)). "Relatives of surviving servicemen receive[ ] awards valued at half of

the awards to family member of th[ose] deceased[.]" Murphy v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 740 F.

Supp. 2d 51, 79 (D.D.C. 2010).

In this case, both Plaintiffs were in utero at the time that their fathers were killed; more

specifically, Aliciah Fuller was born less than three months after the attack that killed her father,

and Daniel J. Fuentes was born five months after the attack that killed his father. Special Master

McKay notes that the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has held that "children

who are in utero at the time a parent is killed in a terrorist attack and who are later born may seek

solatium under the FSIA." K.E.FV v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 135 F.4th 988, 996 (D.C. Cir.

2025) (reversing the district court's dismissal of a solatium claim on behalf of an "in utero"

plaintiff). Following that decision, the Honorable John Bates awarded $1.25 million in solatium

damages to an in utero child who was born after her father was injured in an attack. Cabrera v.

Islamic Republic of Iran, Civil Actions Nos. 18-2065, 19-3835, 2025 WL1423739, * 16 (May 16,

2025) (citing Cabrera, No. 19cv-3835, 2024 WL 864092 (D.D.C. Feb. 29, 2024) (anticipating that

if the Court of Appeals held that in utero plaintiffs had standing, it would award a child born after

her father was killed in an attack $2,5 million, since "[w]hile A.M.P. has been deprived of her

father's parental care and support, she has not suffered the same mental anguish as most plaintiffs

who experienced the loss of a parent."))

B. Calculation of Damages for the Two In Utero Plaintiffs

"A court's job in a solatium case is to account for various facts and circumstances, and to

use those factors to arrive at an appropriate numerical expression of total pain and grief -

encapsulated in the solatium award." Oveissi v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 768 F. Supp. 2d 16, 25

(D.D.C. 2011).

5 1. Aliciah Fuller

Aliciah Fuller knows of her father, Alexander Fuller, only through stories about him and

the scrapbooks her aunt made. ECF No. 287, at 7-8 (internal citations omitted). Ms. Fuller

expressed a deep sense of longing for the father she never knew and frustration with the way in

which she "lost the childhood [she] should have had." Id. at 8. When she was younger and feeling

upset, she went to her father's grave "just to feel close to him." Id. at 9. She and her mother would

visit the grave on certain days of the year, and, in recent years, she goes more frequently. Id.

Ms. Fuller's loss of growing up without a father was compounded by watching the way in

which his death affected her mother, who became a widow at age 19. She opined that her mother

loved her, but Ms. Fuller could never fill the void left by her father's death, and furthermore, while

people told her that her mother used to be happy and independent, her father's death broke her

mother. Id. at 9.

Ms. Fuller described growing up without either parent, after her mom's death. She skipped

her high school graduation and thinks about the other milestones her parents will never see. Id. at

She continues to

struggle with the belief that she "never got the parents [she] was supposed to have" and she finds

the pain from losing both to be overwhelming. Id.

Special Master McKay noted that the court in Cabrera awarded an in utero plaintiff half of

the typical baseline award, upon the reasoning that plaintiffs who were in utero when their parent

was killed would not suffer the same mental anguish as a child who knew the parent they lost. In

this case, however, Special Master McKay indicated, and this Court agrees, that "Aliciah's

6 circumstances warrant an award that exceeds even the full baseline award of$5 million for children

of deceased servicemembers." ECF No. 287, at 12. This is because, '[u]nlike typical in-utero

plaintiffs, Aliciah did not simply lose the father she never knew; she lost both parents as a result

of the January 25, 2007 attack [as] [hJer father's death set in motion a chain of events that destroyed

her mother" and left her orphaned at age 16. Id. Accordingly, "[sJhe has experienced precisely

the kind of devasting mental anguish that full baseline awards are meant to compensate, plus

additional grief." Id. The Special Master recommended an award of $7.5 million, which is a

tripling of the $2.5 million used as a baseline in other cases of plaintiffs who were in utero when

they lost a parent. The Court agrees with this recommendation and notes that it is a downward

adjustment from the $8 million requested by Plaintiffs.

2. Daniel J. Fuentes

Daniel Fuentes knows of his father from stories he has been told over the years, as well as

some photos and letters. ECF No. 287, at 14 (internal citations omitted). Mr. Fuentes also

compares himself to his half-sister, who was five years old when their father was killed, and who

has independent memories of him. Id. at 15. Growing up, Mr. Fuentes knew that he and his

family were different, and he was acutely aware of his father not being able to share his successes

when he competed as a member of the wrestling, football, and track teams in middle school and

high school. Id. Mr. Fuentes often wished that his father was around to show him how to do things

and give him advice, as well as to share in his achievements and milestones. Id. at 16. He visits

his father's grave often as he finds it a place where he can "feel very close to him." Id. at 17. He

thinks about his father often, and he proffered that "[n]ot having him [SPC Fuentes] in my life

7 every day hurts inside, and sometimes, it has been hard for me to deal with." Id. at 18. The

Special Master recommends an award of $2.5 million for Daniel J. Fuentes's solatium claim. This

Court agrees with that recommendation and notes that it is consistent with Plaintiffs' request.

In this case, upon review of the Report and Recommendation - which describes in detail

the way in which Aliciah Fuller and Daniel J. Fuentes have been affected by growing up without

a father in their lives, and, for Aliciah, the cascading effect of her father's death resulting in the

loss of her mother - the Court adopts the Special Master 's solatium damage awards - namely,

$7.5 million to Aliciah Fuller, daughter of the late Alexander Fuller, and $2.5 million to Daniel J.

Fuentes, son of the late Daniel A. Fuentes.

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. 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. Accordingly, it is this 20th day of January 2026,

ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the [287] Report and Recommendation by Special

Master McKay. The Court shall issue a separate Order and Judgment, with a damages chart

attached thereto.

COLLEEN Kd LLAR-KOTELY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE