to keep complete records concerning all information subpoenas sent by the creditor if it sends more than fifty such subpoenas per month, see id. § 601. Any violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor, and the New York Attorney General or the District Attorney of any county has the authority to bring an injunctive action to restrain or prevent such practices. See id. § 602. Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, these limited restrictions fall far short of situations in which the New York courts have found preemptory intent. See, e.g., Albany Area Builders Ass’n, 74 N.Y.2d at 377-80, 547 N.Y.S.2d 627, 546 N.E.2d 920 (finding state had enacted comprehensive regulatory scheme in the field of highway funding); Consolidated Edison Co., 60 N.Y.2d at 105-08, 468 N.Y.S.2d 596, 456 N.E.2d 487 (<HOLDING>); People v. De Jesus, 54 N.Y.2d 465, 468, 446
holding state had preempted local regulation regarding the siting of major steam electricgenerating plants holding local regulation of hazardous waste disposal facilities preempted by comprehensive and detailed state regulatory scheme holding that state law claim regarding breach of settlement agreement was preempted by federal labor law holding the state law claims were not preempted holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended