Filing California Form FL-312 starts by checking the box that matches the abduction-prevention order you want, listing each child by name and date of birth, and attaching a sworn declaration that explains the risk factors under Family Code § 3048. The form is an attachment to a Request for Order (FL-300), so it does not stand alone and must be filed with the right packet, the right fee, and the right service.
According to the U.S. State Department’s Office of Children’s Issues, more than 200 California children are reported as international parental abduction cases each year, and many more are taken across state lines. That single statistic explains why judges treat FL-312 requests as urgent and why mistakes on this form can cost a parent custody time, money, and peace of mind.
Here is what you will learn in this guide:
- 📝 How to complete every box, line, and attachment on Form FL-312 without missing a required item.
- ⚖️ How Family Code §§ 3048 and (https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=FAM§ionNum=3408) shape the orders a judge can issue.
- 🌍 How the Hague Convention and non-Hague country risk change your strategy.
- 🛂 How the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program blocks a U.S. passport before it is issued.
- 🚫 How to avoid the seven biggest filing mistakes that get FL-312 requests denied or delayed.
What Form FL-312 Is and Why It Exists
California Form FL-312, titled Request for Order: No Travel with Children, is a Judicial Council attachment used inside a family law case to ask a judge for orders that prevent the abduction of a child by the other parent. The form lives inside the Judicial Council form library and is mandatory whenever a parent seeks the specific abduction-prevention orders authorized by Family Code § 3048(b). Because California law treats child abduction as a severe and often irreversible harm, the Legislature gave judges a checklist of risk factors and a menu of orders, and FL-312 is the form that matches that menu.
The form exists because earlier abduction-prevention orders were inconsistent across counties, and the Legislature wanted every Superior Court to apply the same standard. The plain-English purpose is to give a worried parent a structured way to say, “Here is the risk, and here are the orders I want.” If a parent ignores the form and writes a free-form request, the judge can deny the orders for lack of statutory findings, and the consequence is that the child remains exposed to abduction risk while the case drags on.
A real-world example shows the stakes. Maria, a mother in San Diego, learned that her ex-husband bought one-way tickets to a country that is not a Hague signatory; she filed FL-312 the same week, asked for passport surrender, and the judge granted a temporary order within 48 hours. A common misconception is that FL-312 is only for international cases, but the form also covers interstate abduction and even short-distance flight risks within California.
The Statutory Backbone
Family Code § 3048 is the heart of the form. Subsection (a) requires every custody order to include the basis for jurisdiction, the manner of notice, and a clear statement that violating the order may be a crime. Subsection (b) lists the risk factors a judge must weigh, including prior abduction or threats, lack of strong ties to California, strong ties to another country, and a history of domestic violence.
The consequence of skipping a § 3048(b) factor on the form is severe, because judges often deny orders that fail to map onto the statute. A common misconception is that listing one risk factor is enough; in practice, the more factors you can document with specifics, the stronger the order will be. James, a father in Sacramento, listed five factors with dates, screenshots, and travel records, and the court issued a full passport-surrender order that same hearing.
How FL-312 Fits the Full RFO Packet
FL-312 never travels alone. It rides as an attachment to Form FL-300, the Request for Order, which is the umbrella motion that opens the abduction-prevention request. You also typically file Form FL-311 for child custody and visitation attachments, Form FL-341(B) for the children’s holiday schedule when relevant, and the UCCJEA Declaration (FL-105) to confirm jurisdiction.
The consequence of filing FL-312 without FL-300 is that the clerk will reject the packet at intake, and the consequence of skipping FL-105 is that a judge can refuse to act because California’s jurisdiction is not on the record. Priya, a mother in Alameda County, learned this the hard way when her FL-312 sat unfiled for ten days because she forgot the FL-105. A common misconception is that the clerk will tell you which forms are missing, but clerks are barred from giving legal advice and will only flag obvious defects.
Before You Open the Form: Five Decisions
Before you fill out a single box on FL-312, you must make five decisions that change every later answer. These decisions shape the orders you will request, the evidence you will attach, and the urgency level you will claim. Skipping these decisions leads to inconsistent answers across the form and a weaker record at the hearing.
The first decision is jurisdiction. Under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, California must be the child’s home state, and FL-105 must show six months of California residency. The second decision is risk classification: international, interstate, or in-state. The third is order menu: which of the § 3048(b) orders you want. The fourth is evidence inventory: texts, emails, plane tickets, foreign property records. The fifth is temporary versus permanent: whether you need an emergency order under California Rules of Court 5.151.
A real-world example clarifies the stakes. Daniel, a father in Orange County, classified his case as in-state, asked only for a travel-notice order, and learned at the hearing that the mother had already booked international flights. A common misconception is that you can amend the form orally at the hearing, but judges generally rule on what is in writing, and oral expansion is rarely granted.
Line-by-Line Walkthrough of Form FL-312
The current version of FL-312 has a caption block, eight numbered sections, and a signature line. Each section has multiple checkboxes, and almost every checkbox has a consequence if you choose wrong. The walkthrough below mirrors the live form, so you can fill it in as you read.
Caption Block and Case Identification
The caption block at the top of FL-312 must match the caption on FL-300 exactly. You enter the petitioner’s name, the respondent’s name, the case number, and the court branch. The consequence of a mismatch is that the clerk may treat FL-312 as a new filing and reject it.
A plain-English explanation is that the caption tells the clerk which file the form belongs to. The consequence of leaving the case number blank is that the form may be lost in the clerk’s intake queue. Aisha, a mother in Los Angeles, copied her caption from a prior FL-300 and avoided a two-week delay. A common misconception is that the Other Parent/Party line is optional in two-parent cases, but you should still confirm the box you check.
Section 1: Children Covered by the Request
Section 1 asks you to list every child for whom you want abduction-prevention orders. You enter the child’s full legal name, date of birth, age, and sex. The consequence of leaving a child off the list is that the orders will not protect that child, even if the judge clearly intended to cover the whole family.
A plain-English point is that judges issue orders only for the children named on the form. Carlos, a father in Fresno, forgot to list his step-daughter even though she shared the same household, and the resulting passport order did not cover her. A common misconception is that children of the marriage is enough; you must name each child individually.
Section 2: Travel Restriction Orders
Section 2 contains the core travel-restriction checkboxes. The choices include barring removal of the child from a county, from California, or from the United States, and requiring written consent or a court order before any travel. The consequence of checking only the U.S. box is that the other parent could still take the child to a remote part of California or another state.
A plain-English explanation is that travel restrictions are layered, and you should check every layer that fits the risk. Sofia, a mother in San Mateo, checked county, state, and country boxes, which gave the sheriff a clear basis to stop a cross-county move. A common misconception is that the strictest order will always be granted; judges balance restrictions against the other parent’s lawful travel needs.
Section 3: Passport Controls
Section 3 covers passport surrender, passport non-issuance, and enrollment in the Children’s Passport Issuance Alert Program (CPIAP). You can ask the court to order the other parent to surrender any existing U.S. or foreign passport for the child to the court clerk or to your attorney. The consequence of skipping CPIAP is that the State Department will not flag a future passport application, and a parent could obtain a new passport in days.
A plain-English point is that CPIAP is free, fast, and powerful, and pairing it with passport surrender closes most international exit routes. Wei, a father in Santa Clara, paired CPIAP with a foreign-passport surrender order and stopped a planned trip through Vancouver. A common misconception is that CPIAP blocks foreign passports, but it only blocks U.S. passports; foreign consulates follow their own rules.
Section 4: Bond, Travel Itinerary, and Notice
Section 4 lets you ask the court to require a cash or property bond, a sworn travel itinerary, and advance written notice before any out-of-state travel. The bond is meant to fund recovery efforts if abduction occurs, and the itinerary creates a paper trail. The consequence of skipping the bond box in a high-risk case is that you may have no funds for a Hague application, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars.
A plain-English explanation is that bonds are leverage, not punishment. Hannah, a mother in Riverside, secured a $50,000 bond against the father’s home equity, and the order alone deterred the planned trip. A common misconception is that judges will not order bonds against a parent of modest means, but Family Code § 3048(b)(2)(F) authorizes bonds proportional to the risk and the family’s resources.
Section 5: Custody and Supervised Visitation Modifications
Section 5 lets you request changes to custody and visitation that reduce abduction risk. Options include supervised visitation, exchange at a police station, and prohibitions on overnight stays during the pendency of the case. The consequence of asking for a sweeping change without facts is that judges may deny the request as overbroad.
A plain-English point is that targeted requests beat broad ones. Marcus, a father in Contra Costa County, asked only for supervised visitation at a licensed exchange center, and the judge granted it the same day. A common misconception is that supervised visitation is permanent; most orders are temporary and revisited at trial.
Section 6: Identifying Information Orders
Section 6 asks the court to order the other parent to provide identifying information about themselves and any third parties who might assist abduction. The information includes Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, vehicle records, employer information, and known addresses abroad. The consequence of skipping this section is that law enforcement may struggle to locate the child if abduction occurs.
A plain-English explanation is that this section turns abstract risk into investigable leads. Yuki, a mother in Sonoma County, used the order to obtain the father’s foreign relatives’ addresses, which later helped a Hague petition. A common misconception is that this information is private and unobtainable, but Family Code § 3048(b)(2)(I) explicitly authorizes the disclosure.
Section 7: Address Confidentiality and Safe Exchange
Section 7 covers address confidentiality, exchange location, and use of the Safe at Home program when domestic violence is part of the picture. You can ask the court to seal your address from the other parent and route service through a confidential agent. The consequence of skipping this section in a domestic violence case is that the other parent may locate you through the case file.
A plain-English point is that confidentiality and abduction prevention often overlap. Elena, a mother in Kern County, paired Safe at Home enrollment with FL-312, and the case file never disclosed her new address. A common misconception is that Safe at Home is automatic for domestic violence victims; you must apply separately through the California Secretary of State.
Section 8: Other Orders and the Declaration
Section 8 is the catch-all for orders not listed elsewhere, including counseling, GPS monitoring, and orders regarding pets that travel with the child. You also attach a sworn declaration that walks through every § 3048(b) factor with specific facts. The consequence of leaving the declaration thin is that the judge has no basis to make findings, and the orders may be denied.
A plain-English explanation is that the declaration is where you tell the story. Tomás, a father in Ventura County, attached a 12-page declaration with text screenshots, flight searches, and a foreign property deed, and the judge cited the declaration in granting every requested order. A common misconception is that the declaration must be drafted by an attorney; pro per parents can write strong declarations by following the § 3048(b) checklist.
Three Common Scenarios and Their Outcomes
Scenarios help you map your facts onto the form. The three patterns below cover the majority of FL-312 filings in California Superior Courts. Each table shows the Risk Factor and the FL-312 Response.
Scenario A: International Abduction Risk
| Risk Factor | FL-312 Response |
|---|---|
| Other parent holds dual citizenship in non-Hague country | Check Section 2 country bar and Section 3 passport surrender |
| Recent purchase of one-way tickets | Attach booking confirmation to declaration; request emergency hearing |
| Foreign property and family abroad | Request bond under Section 4 sized to Hague litigation costs |
Scenario B: Interstate Abduction Risk
| Risk Factor | FL-312 Response |
|---|---|
| Other parent recently lost employment in California | Check Section 2 state bar and Section 4 itinerary requirement |
| Threats to start over in another state | Request Section 6 identifying information for out-of-state relatives |
| History of unilateral moves | Request Section 5 supervised exchange at police station |
Scenario C: In-State Flight and Domestic Violence
| Risk Factor | FL-312 Response |
|---|---|
| Active DVRO and pattern of stalking | Pair FL-312 with Section 7 confidentiality and Safe at Home |
| Threats to disappear within California | Check Section 2 county bar and Section 5 supervised visitation |
| Prior CPS involvement | Attach CPS records to declaration and request Section 8 counseling |
Mistakes to Avoid When Filing FL-312
Mistakes on FL-312 lead to denied orders, lost time, and continuing risk to the child. The list below comes from common patterns observed in California family courts and from the Judicial Council’s self-help guidance.
- Filing FL-312 without FL-300, which causes clerk rejection and a wasted filing fee.
- Skipping the UCCJEA Declaration (FL-105), which leaves jurisdiction unproven and invites a continuance.
- Listing only one § 3048(b) risk factor when more apply, which weakens the record and limits the orders the judge can issue.
- Forgetting CPIAP enrollment, which leaves U.S. passport issuance as an open exit route.
- Drafting a thin declaration without dates, screenshots, or documents, which gives the judge no basis for findings.
- Misnaming a child or omitting a child, which leaves that child unprotected by the eventual order.
- Failing to serve the other parent under Code of Civil Procedure § 1005, which can void the hearing.
- Asking for overbroad orders without tailoring, which invites denial as not narrowly drawn.
- Ignoring foreign passports, which leaves a major exit route open even after U.S. passport surrender.
- Missing the 16-court-day notice rule for non-emergency RFOs, which forces a re-set of the hearing.
Named Examples That Illustrate the Rules
Concrete examples make the rules stick. Each named example below shows how a parent translated a risk factor into the right FL-312 response.
Olivia, a mother in Marin County, learned that the father had renewed his Brazilian passport and bought tickets through Mexico City. She filed FL-312 with FL-300 and a request for emergency orders (FL-305), checked Section 3 passport surrender for both U.S. and Brazilian passports, and attached the booking confirmation. The judge granted every requested order at an ex parte hearing the next morning.
Devon, a father in Yolo County, faced a mother who had moved her elderly parents to Nevada and listed the family home for sale. He filed FL-312, checked Section 2 state bar and Section 4 bond, and asked for a $25,000 bond against her share of the home sale. The judge ordered the bond and required 30-day written notice before any out-of-state travel.
Nadia, a mother in San Bernardino County with an active DVRO, paired FL-312 with Safe at Home enrollment and a request for police-station exchanges. She checked Section 5 supervised visitation, Section 7 confidentiality, and Section 8 counseling. The judge issued a layered order that protected both her location and her child’s stability.
Do’s and Don’ts for FL-312
The do’s and don’ts below come from California family law practice and the structure of Family Code § 3048. Each item includes the reason behind it.
- Do file FL-300, FL-312, and FL-105 together, because the clerk treats them as a single packet and the judge needs all three to act.
- Do quote § 3048(b) factors in your declaration, because judges must make findings on those factors and your wording helps them.
- Do request CPIAP enrollment, because it is free and closes the U.S. passport route within 24 hours of filing.
- Do attach documentary evidence such as texts, flight searches, and foreign deeds, because declarations without exhibits carry less weight.
- Do tailor each requested order to a specific risk, because narrow orders survive appellate review.
- Don’t rely on oral expansion at the hearing, because judges rule on the written request.
- Don’t skip foreign passport surrender, because U.S. passport surrender alone leaves an open route.
- Don’t file emergency orders without facts that show immediate and irreparable harm under Rule 5.151, because frivolous emergency filings can lead to sanctions.
- Don’t forget proof of service, because an unserved RFO cannot proceed.
- Don’t bury risk factors in long paragraphs, because judges scan declarations and need clear headings.
Pros and Cons of Filing FL-312
Filing FL-312 is powerful but not free of trade-offs. The list below weighs the upsides against the downsides.
- Pro: It maps directly onto the § 3048(b) menu, which makes judicial findings easier and orders more defensible on appeal.
- Pro: It pairs naturally with CPIAP and Safe at Home, which extend protection beyond the four corners of the order.
- Pro: It can be filed pro per with self-help center support, which lowers the cost barrier.
- Pro: It can be expedited under Rule 5.151 in true emergencies, which compresses the timeline to days.
- Pro: It creates a written record that supports later contempt and criminal referrals if the order is violated.
- Con: It signals the other parent to react, which can accelerate flight risk before service.
- Con: It requires careful drafting, and a weak declaration can lead to denial that is hard to refile.
- Con: It can trigger retaliatory filings, including counter-RFOs and DVRO requests.
- Con: It can strain co-parenting relationships even when no abduction was actually planned.
- Con: It does not bind foreign governments, which limits its reach in non-Hague countries.
Filing, Service, and Hearing Logistics
Once FL-312 is drafted, you file the full packet at the clerk’s office in the county where the family law case is open. The filing fee for an RFO is set by Government Code § 70617, and a fee waiver is available through Form FW-001 for parents who qualify. The consequence of filing in the wrong county is that the case can be transferred and the hearing reset.
Service is governed by Code of Civil Procedure § 1005 and California Rule of Court 5.92, which generally require 16 court days plus mailing time before the hearing. Personal service by a non-party adult is the safest method, and proof of service is filed on Form FL-330. The consequence of defective service is that the judge cannot make orders against the absent parent.
At the hearing, the judge reviews the declarations, hears short argument, and issues findings on each § 3048(b) factor. The order is captured on Form FL-341 and any needed attachments. Brianna, a mother in Stanislaus County, brought a binder with tabs matching each § 3048(b) factor and walked the judge through each tab in under ten minutes.
Recap of Key Rulings and Authorities
California appellate courts have shaped how FL-312 is used in practice. In In re Marriage of Abargil (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1429, the court emphasized that abduction-prevention orders must include the § 3048(a) advisements and that omissions can be reversible error. The consequence of missing those advisements is that an order can be set aside on appeal.
In In re Marriage of Condon (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 533, the court approved bond requirements and other safeguards against international relocation, especially to non-Hague countries. The consequence in practice is that judges in California regularly approve sizable bonds when the risk is international and the resources exist. Reyes, a father in San Joaquin County, cited Condon in his FL-312 declaration and obtained a $100,000 bond.
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction governs return petitions when a child is taken to a signatory country. The International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1204, criminalizes the removal of a child from the United States with intent to obstruct parental rights, and a strong FL-312 record supports later federal action.
FAQs
Is FL-312 only for international abduction cases?
No. FL-312 covers international, interstate, and in-state abduction risks, and the form’s checkboxes let a parent layer county, state, and country travel restrictions to match the actual facts.
Can I file FL-312 without a lawyer?
Yes. California self-help centers and the Judicial Council guides support pro per filings, and many parents successfully file FL-312 with FL-300 and FL-105 on their own.
Do I need to pay a filing fee for FL-312?
No. FL-312 is an attachment to FL-300, so the RFO fee covers it, and a fee waiver is available for qualifying parents.
Can FL-312 stop a foreign passport from being issued?
No. CPIAP only flags U.S. passports, but the court can order surrender of any foreign passport already in the parent’s possession.
Will the judge decide my FL-312 the day I file it?
No. Most FL-312 hearings are set at least 16 court days out under Rule 5.92, unless you obtain emergency orders under Rule 5.151.
Can I use FL-312 if there is no current custody case?
No. FL-312 attaches to an existing family law case, so you must first open a dissolution, parentage, or custody case before filing FL-312.
Does FL-312 protect step-children?
Yes. If the step-child is a subject of the custody case, you can list the child by name in Section 1, and the orders can cover that child.
Can the other parent oppose my FL-312?
Yes. The responding parent files a Responsive Declaration (FL-320) and may attach evidence that contests each § 3048(b) factor.
Will the court order a bond automatically?
No. You must check the bond box in Section 4 and justify the amount in your declaration, and the judge weighs the family’s resources before ordering a bond.
Can FL-312 orders be modified later?
Yes. Either parent can file a new RFO to modify or terminate the orders if circumstances change, and the court applies the same § 3048(b) factors at the modification hearing.
Does FL-312 trigger criminal charges?
No. FL-312 is a civil family law tool, but a violation can support criminal referral under Penal Code § 278.5 and 18 U.S.C. § 1204.
Is FL-312 the right form for relocation disputes?
No. Pure move-away cases use a different procedural path under In re Marriage of LaMusga (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1072, although FL-312 can be added when the proposed move shows abduction risk.
Related reading
- How to Fill Out California Form DV-145 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-260 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-311 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-341 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-344 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-600 (w/Examples) + FAQs
- How to Fill Out California Form FL-120 (w/Examples) + FAQs