James Arthur Lee filed a notice of appeal from the trial court's order denying his petition for writ of mandamus. On March 6, 2019, we dismissed this appeal because, by previous order entered by this Court in case number 3D03-1393, James Arthur Lee was prohibited from filing any pro se appeals or petitions related to his conviction and sentence (or related to his prisoner status resulting from his conviction and sentence) in lower tribunal case number 96-6742.1 We further directed Lee to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for violating this Court's order in 3D03-1393 by continuing to file pro se pleadings with this Court related to lower tribunal case number 96-6742.
Lee has filed a document which we treat as his response to the show cause order. Following our review, we conclude that James Arthur Lee has failed to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for violating this Court's order in 3D03-1393, by continuing to file pro se pleadings with this Court related to lower tribunal case number 96-6742. We further note that appellant previously attempted to file pro se pleadings in 3D17-1231, resulting in a similar dismissal order.
We prohibit James Arthur Lee from filing any pro se pleading or paper with this Court related to lower tribunal case number 96-6742, or related to his prisoner status resulting from his conviction and sentence in case number 96-6742. We hereby direct the Clerk of this Court to refuse to accept any such pleading or paper relating to lower tribunal case number 96-6742 unless it has been reviewed and signed by *688an attorney who is a duly licensed member of The Florida Bar in good standing.
Additionally, we direct the Clerk of this Court to forward a copy of this order to the Florida Department of Corrections for its consideration of disciplinary action, including the forfeiture of gain time. See § 944.279(1), Fla. Stat. (2018).