Watts v. Watts, 935 F.3d 1138 (10th Cir. Sept. 5, 2019)
This case arose out of an international custody dispute under the Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The district court denied the petitioner’s request to return the children to Australia, because he failed to prove that Australia was the children’s habitual residence. Affirming, the Tenth Circuit reiterated that permanency is not necessary to establish habitual residency under the Hague Convention, and the district court applied the correct standard when it considered and weighed parental intent and acclimatization as independent factors.