DOE v. DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA Cite as 414 F.Supp.3d 109 (D.D.C. 2019) John DOE A-1, et al. Plaintiffs, v. DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS JUNGSONG-DONG, Central District, Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Defendant. 109 (6) North Korea was liable for former servicemembers and their estates for assault, battery, false imprisonment, and intentional infliction of emotional distress; and (7) North Korea was liable to family members and estates of former United States servicemembers for solation damages. Motion granted. No. 18-cv-0252 (DLF) United States District Court, District of Columbia. Signed October 22, 2019 Background: Former United States servicemembers, who were kidnapped, imprisoned, and tortured by agents of North Korea, as well as their families and estates, filed suit against North Korea pursuant to the private cause of action against foreign State Sponsors of Terrorism provided by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), seeking money damages for torture, hostage taking, assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of solatium. Plaintiffs moved for partial default judgment on liability. Holdings: The District Court, Dabney L. Friedrich, J., held that: (1) terrorism exception to FSIA applied, and thus subject matter jurisdiction existed; (2) District Court was required to exercise its subject matter jurisdiction; (3) plaintiffs met service of process requirements under FSIA, and thus District Court had personal jurisdiction over North Korea; (4) plaintiffs had standing; (5) North Korea committed acts of hostage-taking, torture, and extrajudicial killing; 1. Evidence O43(3) A series of Foreign Sovereign Immunities (FSIA)-related cases will often stem from one terrorist attack, and courts thus frequently taken judicial notice of earlier, related proceedings. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1605A. 2. Evidence O43(1) In the context of judicial notice, a court cannot simply adopt factual findings from an earlier, related proceeding without scrutiny. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). 3. Evidence O43(1) In the context of judicial notice, a court may rely on evidence presented in earlier, related litigation and make its own independent findings of fact based on that evidence. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). 4. International Law O518 The standard under which a Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) plaintiff can obtain default judgment against a foreign state by establishing his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the court mirrors the federal civil procedural rule governing default judgments against the United States government. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1608(e); Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(d). 5. International Law O518 The requirement that a plaintiff pursuant to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) establish his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the

Select target paragraph3