for concluding that insurance establishments are not exempt as a retail or service establishment. Mot. at 20-22. According to SelectQuote, “[sjection 779.317 is an ‘antiquated interpretation’ that does not take into account the fundamental changes over the past four decades regarding what is considered a ‘retail or service establishment,’ and it should not preclude SelectQuote from applying the section 7(i) exemption to Burden.” Id. at 22. To support its position, SelectQuote points to cases where courts have declined to defer to the DOL’s list of non-retail establishments set forth in § 779.317 where there is no discernable rational basis for the DOL’s determination that type of business lacks a retail concept. See Martin v. The Refrigeration Sch., Inc., 968 F.2d 3 (9th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); Reich v. Cruises Only, Inc., 1997 WL 1507504,
holding that there is a rational basis for the distinction holding that a law survives rational basis review so long as there is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis for the classification holding that travel agency specializing in cruise vacations possessed a retail concept despite the fact that  779317 lists travel agencies as lacking a retail concept concluding that the regulation appeared to be arbitrary and without any rational basis explained in the regulation recognizing the districts duty of care for the protection of school children in its schools holding that there was no rational basis for  779317s distinction that sjchools except schools for mentally or physically handicapped or gifted children lack a retail concept