ORDER

DEBORAH BARNES, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff alleges defendant was deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment. On May 13, 2019, plaintiff filed a document entitled "Motion for Temporary Injunction." (ECF No. 28.) Plaintiff appears to be seeking help getting access to his medical records.

On May 30, defendant filed an opposition to plaintiff's motion. (ECF No. 29.) While the court understands that plaintiff does not meet the technical requirements for obtaining injunctive relief, the court is concerned that plaintiff may be having difficulty getting access to his medical records through an "Olsen review," an administrative procedure which allows an inmate to review his central file, including his medical records. See Johnson v. Echano, No. 14-cv-4166-YGR (PR), 2016 WL 4239414, at *4 n. 5 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2016).

Defendant points out that plaintiff has right to review his health records. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 15, § 3370. According to defendant, plaintiff must submit a request to his correctional counselor for access to his medical records. Plaintiff does not explain whether or not he has submitted such a request or what other methods he may have used to attempt to obtain access to his file.

If plaintiff feels he still requires the court's assistance to obtain access to his prison medical records, he must explain to the court just what he has done to attempt to obtain access to them.

Accordingly, within twenty days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall file a supplement to his motion which explains everything he has done to attempt to get access to his medical records. If plaintiff does not file an explanation, or otherwise respond to this order in a timely manner, the court will dismiss his motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.