Stern v. Stern, 639 F.3d 449

DJ Stern, a seven-year-old, was living in Iowa with his mother Michelle and half-siblings after moving from Israel in 2005.
Martin Stern petitioned under ICARA, seeking DJ's transfer to Israel for custody adjudication under the Hague Convention.
District court held Iowa was DJ's habitual residence at the time of alleged wrongful retention and denied relief.
Michelle is a US-Israel dual citizen; Martin is a dual Israeli-Canadian; no civil wedding in Israel.
DJ had lived in Iowa since age two, attended kindergarten there, and had strong Iowa connections and acclimatization.
Court conducted bench trial in June 2010 and applied Barzilay framework, focusing on DJ’s perspective and acclimatization.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether DJ’s habitual residence was Iowa or Israel	Stern argues parental intent to return to Israel should govern	Stern argues settled purpose from DJ’s perspective favors Iowa	Iowa is DJ's habitual residence

Barzilay v. Barzilay, 600 F.3d 912 (8th Cir.2010) (habitz focused on child's perspective; settled purpose and acclimatization)
Silverman v. Silverman, 338 F.3d 886 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc; emphasis on child-focused analysis under Hague Convention)
Mozes v. Mozes, 239 F.3d 1067 (9th Cir.2001) (settled parental intent not dispositive; caution against undervaluing child’s acclimatization)
Whiting v. Krassner, 391 F.3d 540 (3d Cir.2004) (settled purpose may be limited; education can prompt move)
Karkkainen v. Kovalchuk, 445 F.3d 280 (3d Cir.2006) (child-focused assessment of acclimatization and contacts)
Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d 981 (6th Cir.2007) (criticism of Mozes approach; supports child-centric view)