ORDER REGARDING NOMINATION OF POTENTIAL EXPERTS

MIRANDA M. DU, Chief District Judge.

In this capital habeas corpus action, Petitioner Kevin James Lisle has filed, pro se, a motion to waive further proceedings and voluntarily dismiss this action. (ECF No. 359.) The Court has determined that Petitioner's motion raises the questions of whether Petitioner is competent to make such a waiver and whether his waiver is knowing, intelligent and voluntary, and the Court has determined that a mental health examination of Petitioner is necessary in order to resolve those questions. (See ECF No. 358 (Order entered June 20, 2019).) Respondents and the Federal Public Defender ("FPD") entered a stipulation (ECF No. 362), and the Court approved the stipulation (ECF No. 363), establishing a procedure for the mental health examination. In accordance with the stipulation, Respondents and the FPD conferred and attempted to agree upon an expert, but because they could not agree, each submitted two names of potential experts. (ECF No. 367.) The Court held a telephonic hearing (see ECF No. 369), and then accepted a filing from Respondents stating their position concerning one of the experts nominated by the FPD (ECF No. 371).

The Court has considered the potential experts nominated by Respondents and the FPD, and the positions of Respondents and the FPD regarding the four nominated potential experts, and the Court will decline to appoint any of those four. Rather, the Court will direct Respondents and the FPD to confer further and attempt to reach agreement as to an expert other than the four that have been nominated. If Respondents and the FPD cannot agree upon an expert, they are directed to each submit two names of potential experts to the Court by September 27, 2019. In doing so, Respondents and the FPD should seek to identify as potential experts: psychiatrists who have clinical and/or forensic experience, as well as, perhaps, academic experience; psychiatrists who have experience in criminal legal matters, preferably capital cases; and psychiatrists who have exhibited neutrality in criminal matters, perhaps by working for both the prosecution and the defense in such matters.