RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil (CNN) -- An American man fighting for custody of his 9-year-old son has been invited to spend Christmas with the boy's Brazilian family, the family's attorney said Friday.

David Goldman has been locked in a legal battle over custody of his son, Sean Goldman, with the family of the boy's deceased mother.

The family's attorney, Sergio Tostes, said Friday that the legal battle had gone too far.

"It is about time that Sean's family, and I mean all Sean's family, get together. I am authorized by Mrs. Silvana Bianchi to invite you, Mr. Goldman, to spend Christmas night at her house," Tostes said, referring to Sean's maternal grandmother. "This will be a long awaited family reunion"

"I hope you can accept and we can talk logistics," he said, with the boy's grandmother standing next to him.

Tostes also said that the family would consider allowing the boy to go to the United States, perhaps for the holidays, if Sean wants to go. However, "Sean must be heard in court," he said.

There was no immediate response from Goldman.

Earlier Friday, Goldman slammed a decision by a Brazilian Supreme Court justice Thursday that prevented the boy's return to the United States. That decision had "nothing to do with the merits" of the case, he said.

On Wednesday, a lower court unanimously upheld a decision ordering that Sean be returned to his father in New Jersey. That decision was made in accordance with the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abductions.

Answer this series of questions:

1. Where does the story take place?
2. What nationality is the father?
3. Who has custody of his son?
4. How old is the boy?
5. Where is his mother?
6. Did the father want custody of his son?
7. Was it eventually granted?
8. By whom?
9. Was that the first decision pertaining to the case?
10. Who else ruled on it?
11. Why was their decision overturned?
12. Where did the boys father live?

Numbered answers:
1. RIO DE JANEIRO
2. American
3. the boy's Brazilian family
4. Nine
5. deceased
6. yes
7. yes
8. a lower court
9. no
10. the Brazilian Supreme Court
11. the decision had "nothing to do with the merits" of the case
12. New Jersey