Fisher v. Dist. Ct. (Fisher)

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