DOE v. DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA Cite as 414 F.Supp.3d 109 (D.D.C. 2019) the typical array of compensatory damages that may be awarded against tortfeasors’’ in the plaintiffs’ states. Id. at 77. It also awarded damages for the ‘‘pain and suffering endured by [the plaintiffs] over the eleven months of their captivity [that] was extensive and shocking’’ and ‘‘likely will continue to endure throughout the rest of their lives.’’ Id. The factual findings in Massie supply many of the relevant facts here. 2. This Action The plaintiffs in this case comprise 46 surviving crew members of the Pueblo,1 89 of the crew’s immediate family members,2 and 36 estates of deceased crew members or their deceased immediate family members.3 The identities of the former crew members have been masked, and any personal identifying information has been sealed. See generally Am. Compl, Dkt. 14. The plaintiffs seek money damages for torture, hostage taking, assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and loss of solatium under § 1605A(c)’s private right of action for money damages for personal injury caused by state sponsors of terrorism. Am. Compl. ¶ 19. North Korea was properly served with a summons and copy of the complaint and a translation of those documents on April 4, 2018. Summons Returned Executed, Dkt. 117 19.4 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1608(d), North Korea had sixty days—until June 3, 2018—to respond. After North Korea failed to either appear or respond, the Clerk of the Court entered a default on June 11, 2018. Clerk’s Entry of Default, Dkt. 21. The plaintiffs then requested that the Court take judicial notice of the findings in Massie and of the expert testimony about the North Korean regime given in Warmbier v. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, 356 F. Supp. 3d 30 (D.D.C. 2018), and moved for a default judgment. Pls.’ Mot. for Partial J. Liability 1, Dkt. 49 (Pls.’ Mot.). B. Relevant Findings of Fact [1–3] The Court’s factual findings are drawn from the plaintiffs’ numerous affidavits and declarations, the public record, and Judge Kennedy’s findings in Massie. A court may take judicial notice of any fact ‘‘not subject to reasonable dispute because it TTT can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.’’ Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). A series of FSIA-related cases will often stem from one terrorist attack, and ‘‘[c]ourts in this District have thus frequently taken judicial notice of earlier, related proceedings.’’ Rimkus v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 750 F. Supp. 2d 163, 171 (D.D.C. 2010) (citations omitted). The 1. Plaintiffs A-1, A-2 and A-4 through A-49. See Am. Compl. App’x I, Dkt. 5; Am. Compl. App’x II, Dkt. 13. The estates of plaintiffs A-3, A-45, and A-37 were substituted for those plaintiffs. See Pls.’ Mots. to Substitute at Dkts. 42, 43, and 58. 3. Plaintiffs A-3, A-35, A-37, B-73, and C-1 through C-32. See Am. Compl. App’x I; Am. Compl. App’x II; Pls.’ First Mot. to Substitute. The estates of plaintiffs C-4 and C-32 were substituted for plaintiffs C-4 and C-32. See Pls.’ First Mot. to Substitute; Pls.’ Second Mot. to Substitute, Dkt. 69. 2. Plaintiffs B-2 through B-72 and B-74 through B-91. See Am. Compl. App’x I; Am. Compl. App’x II. Plaintiff B-73’s estate was substituted for plaintiff B-73. See Pls.’ First Mot. to Substitute. Plaintiff B-1 voluntarily dismissed her claim without prejudice. See Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, Dkt. 76. 4. Consistent with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 1608(a)(3), the Clerk of Courts mailed the summons and complaint and Korean translations of each to the ministry of foreign affairs of North Korea using the DHL International service. See Gates v. Syrian Arab Republic, 646 F.3d 1, 4 (D.C. Cir. 2011).