ORDER DENYING PETITION
This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus. A writ of mandamus is available to compel the performance of an act that the law requires as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to control an arbitrary or capricious exercise of discretion. See NRS 34.160; Intl Game Tech., Inc. v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 124 Nev. 193, 197, 179 P.3d 556, 558 (2008). Whether a petition for extraordinary writ relief will be entertained rests within this courts sound discretion. D.H. Horton, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 123 Nev. 468, 473-75, 168 PM 731, 736-37 (2007). 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). Further, it is petitioners responsibility to provide this court with all documents essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition. NRAP 21(a)(4).
Problematically, petitioner has not provided this court with exhibits or other documentation that would support his claims for relief. See NRAP 21(a)(4) (providing the petitioner shall submit an appendix containing ail documents “essential to understand the matters set forth in the petition”). Accordingly, we
ORDER the petition DENIED.
Cadish, J.
Stiglich, J.
Herndon, J.