PhD examination is a unique type of assessment with examiners playing a key role in it. Despite extensive research on various modes of academic genre, research on the examiners’ language representing oral review genre is yet underrepresented. One important way to identify this genre is to unpack the metadiscursive features that constitute this type of academic discourse. Using a metadiscourse framework, developed by Hyland (2005), this study investigates the metadiscursive markers that constitute Iranian and International examiners’ language of PhD Dissertation evaluation. The data include the transcriptions of Iranian and International examiners’ evaluative discourse in eight PhD Dissertation defenses, taken place in Iran and the US (MICASE corpus), representing English for Academic Purposes. The results indicate that the examiners use a variety of interactional as well as interactive metadiscourse markers to convey the effective and appropriate evaluation of the PhD Dissertations at hand. Further breakdown of the metadiscourse devices and the comparison of the two sets of data are provided. The results unpack an aspect of oral academic review as a specific genre with implications for both EAP-user examiners and PhD candidates to become aware of the discursive features of the examiners language.