IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ALI SHAHROKHI, No. 83772 Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF FILED CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE NOV 1 2021 DAWN THRONE, DISTRICT JUDGE, A. BROWN Respondents, ROWE COURT

and D AU CLERK KIZZY BURROW, Real Party in Interest.

ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR PROHIBITION

This pro se original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenges a November 8, 2021, district court order that, in part, requires petitioner and real party in interest to serve any documents filed in the court by mail, as well as electronically, and to provide proof of service, before the document will be considered by the court. Petitioner asserts that the requirement is a prior restraint on his court access and free speech rights, and he has filed an emergency motion seeking a stay of that portion of the district court's order. Having considered the petition and supporting documentation, we are not convinced that our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. See Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ relief bears the burden of showing such relief is warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 818 P.2d 849, 851 (1991) (recognizing that writ SUPREME COURT

NEVADA

101 1947A At*. relief is an extraordinary remedy and that this court has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition). The district court's order does not limit petitioner's access to the courts, it merely requires, due to asserted issues with the opposing party receiving service, both parties to also serve filings by mail and to provide proof of service, the latter of which is already rnandated. NRCP 5(b). Moreover, petitioner did not provide this court with a copy of real party in interest's countermotion requesting proper service. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (requiring' appendix to include any- document that may be essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition). Accordingly, we ORDER the petition DENIED.'

J. Cadish

A0,24. Pickering

Herndon

cc: Hon. Dawn Throne, District Judge, Family Court Division Ali Shahrokhi Kizzy Burrow Eighth District Court Clerk

'In light of this order, petitioner's emergency motion • for a stay is denied as moot. SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA

on 1947A 4420.