Anti-Terrorism

Sparacino PLLC represents more than 4,000 Americans, including members of more than 900 Gold Star families, in terrorism matters under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) and Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). While every case is unique, some of our current terrorism-related matters include:

Atchley v. AstraZeneca UK Ltd., No. 1:17-cv-02136 (D.D.C. Compl. filed Oct. 17, 2017), an ATA case against AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, and Roche, alleging that they paid bribes in the form of cash and free goods to Jaysh al-Mahdi (JAM), an Iran-backed, Hezbollah-trained militant group that controlled the Iraqi Ministry of Health in post-Saddam Iraq. Our clients further allege that these corrupt payments provided material support to JAM, which financed and conducted attacks that killed or injured thousands of Americans serving and working in Iraq.

Cabrera v. Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp., Case 1:19-cv-3833 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Dec. 27, 2019), an ATA case against 10 multinational corporations with lucrative businesses that provided engineering, procurement, construction, security, telecom, and/or other such services in post-9/11 Afghanistan, alleging that they made protection payments to the Taliban (including its Haqqani Network).  These corrupt payments provided material support to terrorist groups in Afghanistan, who used their funding to kill and injure thousands of Americans serving and working in post-9/11 Afghanistan.

Cabrera v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Case 1:19-cv-3835 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Dec. 27, 2019), and Adamkavicius v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Case 1:23-cv-3571 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Nov. 30, 2023), each an FSIA case against Iran for actively sponsoring anti-American terrorism in Afghanistan. Iran was designated a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984 and deliberately supported terrorist organizations for the past several decades.

Neiberger v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Case 1:16-cv-02193 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed 2016), and Lee v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Case 1:19-cv-00830 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed 2019), each an FSIA case against Iran for actively sponsoring anti-American terrorism in Iraq by Shiite terrorist groups. Iran was designated a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984 and deliberately supported terrorist organizations for the past several decades.

Schrier v. Qatar Islamic Bank, Case 0:20-cv-60075 (S.D. Fla. Compl. Filed Jan. 13, 2020), an ATA case against a bank that our client alleges openly sponsored Islamist terrorist fundraising.  This case was brought on behalf of Matthew Schrier, an American who was kidnapped in Syria, held captive for more than 200 days, and then escaped captivity.

King v. Habib Bank Ltd., 1:20-cv-04322 (S.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed June 5, 2020), an ATA case against Pakistan’s largest commercial bank, Habib Bank Limited (HBL), that allegedly operated as the primary terrorist finance arm of Pakistan’s intelligence service, which notoriously supported the Taliban (including its Haqqani Network), al-Qaeda, and Lashkar-e-Taiba – the “al-Qaeda Terror Syndicate.” HBL allegedly knowingly provided accounts and facilitated essential transactions that allowed the Syndicate to obtain and move money to terrorists committing attacks on Americans in post-9/11 Afghanistan.

Zobay v. MTN Group Ltd., Case 1:21-cv-03503 (E.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed June 22, 2021), an ATA case against three foreign telecom companies, MTN Group (South Africa), ZTE Corp. (China), and Huawei Co. (China), for aiding Iranian terrorist proxies.  Defendants allegedly engaged in illicit, terrorism-sanctions-busting transactions with known IRGC fronts in order to boost their profits. Our clients allege that those transactions supported terrorism by funding, arming, and logistically supporting a terrorist campaign that stretched for more than a decade, killing and injuring thousands of Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Martino v. Islamic Republic of Iran, Case 1:21-cv-01808 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed July 7, 2021), an FSIA case against Iran for actively sponsoring anti-American terrorism in Iraq by Sunni terrorist groups. Iran was designated a State Sponsor of Terrorism in 1984 and deliberately supported terrorist organizations for the past several decades.

Wildman v. Deutsche Bank AG, Case 1:21-cv-04400 (E.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed Aug. 5, 2021), an ATA case against three of the world’s largest multinational banks, including Deutsche Bank (DB), Standard Chartered Bank (SCB), and Danske Bank (Danske),  related to: (1) their alleged services as a “Laundromat” for al-Qaeda financiers facilitating transfers of hundreds of millions in USD to terrorists; (2) their alleged facilitation of value-added-tax fraud by known al-Qaeda financiers and terrorists; and (3) SCB’s alleged direct enablement of fertilizer bomb networks operated by al-Qaeda and the Haqqani Network.

Davis v. MTN Irancell, Case 1:22-cv-00829 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Mar. 27, 2022), a primary liability ATA case against MTN Group on behalf of American victims of IRGC-sponsored Sunni terrorist attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Chand v. MTN Irancell, Case 1:22-cv-00830 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Mar. 27, 2022), a primary liability ATA case against MTN Group on behalf of American victims of IRGC-sponsored Shiite terrorist attacks in Iraq.

Schmitz v. Ericsson Inc., Case 1:22-cv-02317 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Aug. 5, 2022), and Wirtz v. Ericsson Inc., Case 1:24-cv-00514 (D.D.C. Compl. Filed Feb. 23, 2024), each an ATA case against Swedish telecommunications giant Ericsson and certain of its executives, who are alleged to have made protection payments to ISIS, al-Qaeda, and al-Qaeda-in-Iraq. Our clients’ claims are based in part on Ericsson’s admissions of its misconduct in Iraq and Ericsson’s internal investigation, which was leaked to the media. Defendants are also alleged to have intentionally obstructed vital U.S. government counterterrorism operations, including by repeatedly lying to the U.S. government and by facilitating the shutdown of cellular towers in Afghanistan at the Taliban’s direction. In doing so, our clients allege that Ericsson provided key “cover” and “concealment” to – and thereby logistical aid and support for – al-Qaeda’s, al-Qaeda-in-Iraq’s, and Islamic State’s fundraising rackets while these FTOs were killing and kidnapping Americans.

Estate of Anne T. Smedinghoff v. Standard Chartered Bank, Case 1:23-cv-02865 (S.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed April 5, 2023), an ATA case in which our clients allege that SCB provided key financial services to the primary manufacturer of precursor materials used by anti-American terrorists in Afghanistan to create improvised explosive devices (IEDs)—even after the bank was urged by the U.S. Government to stop doing so to save the lives of American servicemembers.

Hughes v. Reza Zarrab and Halkbank, Case 1:23-cv-06481 (S.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed July 26, 2023), an ATA case against a high-net-worth individual and one of the largest commercial banks in Turkey, alleging that they systematically helped the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) and its affiliates—which were known IRGC fronts—finance terrorist operations by evading anti-terrorism sanctions designed to prevent the IRGC from accessing the proceeds of Iranian oil sales. Through a prolonged campaign of alleged deception, our clients allege Zarrab and Halkbank helped IRGC fronts obtain and deploy at least $20 billion—and by some estimates, as much as $100 billion—while the IRGC was providing critical financial and logistical support to anti-American terrorists worldwide. Our clients allege that defendants thus enabled the IRGC to supply money, weapons, training, technology, and safe haven to terrorists in Afghanistan and Syria, which used that support to attack Americans.

Foley v. LaFarge S.A., Case 1:23-cv-5691 (E.D.N.Y. Compl. Filed July 27, 2023), an ATA case against one of the world’s largest cement manufacturers, alleging that LaFarge bribed and partnered with ISIS and al-Nusrah Front terrorists to protect its operations and profits, an allegation that LaFarge has already been found criminally liable for. Our clients allege that LaFarge paid millions of dollars to terrorists, which aided the attacks that targeted Americans, and that LaFarge knew their conduct was illegal and went to great lengths to conceal it.