Courts in this district have inferred a connection when plaintiffs presented facts supporting the alleged link even in the absence of any statements by Hamas. See, e.g., Force v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 464 F.Supp.3d 323, 346 (D.D.C. 2020) (finding that social media activity, familial connections to Hamas, and the opportunity for the assailant to face fewer counts in an Israeli indictment by having Hamas not claim responsibility was enough to connect the attack to Hamas); Schwartz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. CV 18-1349, 2020 WL 7042842, at *8-*9 (D.D.C. Nov. 30, 2020) (finding sufficient facts to indicate Hamas's responsibility given the attacker's family's public support of Hamas, the fact that no other terrorist organization took responsibility, that the evidence shows the attack was thoroughly planned, and the significance of the date of the attack to Hamas); Cabrera v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. CV 18-2065 & 19-3835, 2022 WL 2817730, at *13 (D.D.C. July 19, 2022) (finding that geography and time period can be enough to attribute an attack to a specific terrorist group).
Finally, there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that any of the seventy-three EFP attacks outlined in the Court's Findings of Fact were "authorized by a previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court" or conducted under the lawful authority of a foreign sovereign. Owens, 864 F.3d at 770; see also Schwartz v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. CV 18-1349 (RDM), 2020 WL 7042842, at *13 (D.D.C. Nov. 30, 2020). Accordingly, the Court concludes that each of the seventy-three non-bellwether EFP attacks constituted an "extrajudicial killing" within the meaning of the FSIA. 28 U.S.C. ยง 1605A(a)(1).