Fisher v. Dist. Ct. (Fisher) ( 2014 )

 within this court's sole discretion to determine if a writ petition will be
considered. Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851. Petitioner bears the
burden of demonstrating that extraordinary relief is warranted. Pan v.
Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004).
Having considered the petition and supporting documents, we
conclude that petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that
extraordinary writ relief is warranted. Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at
844. Petitioner has not provided this court with a copy of the district
court's written order and it appears from the district court's minutes that
there may be unresolved issues concerning petitioner's visitation during
the temporary relocation period. Under these circumstances, we conclude
that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is not warranted at this
time and we deny the petition without prejudice. See NRAP 21(b)(1);
Smith, 107 Nev. at 677, 818 P.2d at 851.
It is so ORDERED.
fizazt, J.
Hardesty
J.
Douglas
J.
cc: Hon. Steven Elliott, District Judge
Roberts Stoffel Family Law Group
Kelleher & Kelleher, LLC
Eighth District Court Clerk
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A