Opinion
No. 66736
07-23-2015
An unpublished order shall not be regarded as precedent and shall not be cited as legal authority. SCR 123.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY RELIEF
This is an original pro se petition for extraordinary writ relief challenging the constitutionality of NRS 432B.470. Having reviewed the petition, we conclude that petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that our intervention by extraordinary writ relief is warranted. First, petitioner failed to submit with the petition an appendix or any documentation essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition. NRAP 21(a)(4) (requiring petitioner to submit with his petition copies of any order, opinion, parts of the record, or any other document that may be essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition); Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228-29, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004). Further, to the extent that petitioner is requesting rehearing of this court's October 17, 2013, decision to deny his writ petition in Docket No. 62922, in which he challenged the notice he was given under NRS 432B.470, such request is untimely. See NRAP 40(a)(1) (providing that a rehearing petition may be filed within 18 days after the court's decision). Accordingly, petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating that our intervention is warranted, Pan, 120 Nev. at 228, 88 P.3d at 844, and we therefore deny the petition. NRAP 21(b)(1).
It is so ORDERED.
/s/_________, J.
Saitta
/s/_________, J.
Gibbons
/s/_________, J.
Pickering
cc: Jerry L.O.
Attorney General/Carson City
Washoe District Court Clerk