Varillas Broca v. Gil Giron, 530 F. App'x 46

Father Jose Leonides Varillas Broca petitioned under the Hague Convention for repatriation of three children wrongfully removed to the U.S. from Mexico; district court denied repatriation for the two younger children and the eldest was beyond the Convention's age scope.
This appeal challenges only the denial of repatriation for the youngest child, JV, on grounds JV was "well settled" in the U.S. under Article 12 of the Hague Convention.
Proceedings were commenced more than one year after JV’s removal, placing the burden on the respondent (mother) to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that JV is well settled.
The district court relied on the multi-factor Lozano framework (age, residence stability, school/daycare attendance, community ties, respondent’s employment/finances, friends/relatives, immigration status) and found JV well settled.
Varillas argued the district court improperly emphasized JV’s relationship with siblings and failed to properly consider the mother’s employment and financial stability; he appealed the well-settled finding.
The Second Circuit reviewed the Convention interpretation de novo and factual findings for clear error and affirmed the district court’s judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether JV is "well settled" in the U.S. under Article 12, barring return after one year	Varillas: JV is not well settled; court erred in weighing factors and should order repatriation	Respondent: JV is well settled due to consistent school attendance, church involvement, and strong family/community ties	Held: Affirmed — on balance JV is well settled; exception to return applies
Whether it was improper to consider JV’s ties to siblings and mother in the well-settled analysis	Varillas: Court placed undue weight on sibling/mother ties in the balancing	Respondent: Family relationships are a permissible and relevant factor under Lozano; court properly considered them among others	Held: Affirmed — family ties are appropriately considered and were one of several factors supporting well-settled finding
Whether the district court failed to consider the mother’s employment/financial stability	Varillas: Court omitted or undervalued mother’s financial/employment situation	Respondent: Court discussed financial stability in context of other factors; Lozano factors are non-exhaustive	Held: Affirmed — any omission was not reversible error; Lozano factors are illustrative, not mandatory

Lozano v. Alvarez, 697 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2012) (sets forth multi-factor test for determining whether a child is "well settled" under the Hague Convention)