12.00. The regulations further provide that in cases where the nature of the individual’s intellectual impairment is such that standardized intelligence tests are precluded, then medical reports specifically describing the level of intellectual function should be obtained. Id. Here, there is no evidence or reason to believe that plaintiff’s impairments preclude standardized intelligence testing. In light of the Secretary’s regulations, such a test should have been administered to plaintiff. Here again, however, the Secretary seeks to avoid this result by shifting the burden to plaintiff. The Secretary asserts that plaintiff had an opportunity to provide evidence of mental retardation, but failed to do so. See Willis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 727 F.2d 551 (6th Cir.1984) (<HOLDING>). The Secretary points out that at the close of
holding jurisdiction available only under  405g holding that 42 usc  405g limits the district courts discretion to remand for reconsideration in light of new evidence holding a district court remanding a case pursuant to sentence four of  405g must order judgment in the case and may not retain jurisdiction over the ad ministrative proceedings on remand holding that a state is not a person under 42 usc  1983 holding that a sentence four remand under 42 usc  405g is a final appealable decision and that a party who wins a remand under sentence four is a prevailing party for purposes of the eaja