method of calculating them are business decisions to be made by each bank, in its discretion, according to sound banking judgment and safe and sound banking principles.” 12 C.F.R. § 7.4002(b)(2). Moreover, the OCC interpretations of its own regulations are controlling unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. In re HSBC, 1 F.Supp.3d at 46. “A national bank may exercise its deposit-taking powers without -regard to state law limitations concerning,” among other things, “disclosure requirements.” 12 C.F.R. § 7.4007(b)(3). [22] The Bank claims that Depositors have only made allegations that invoke the deposit-taking powers and disclosure obligations of a bank, and are accordingly preempted. In asserting its preemption argument, the Bank relies heavily upon Gutierrez II (<HOLDING>). [23] The Gutierrez case concerned Wells
holding that the national bank act preempts state law claims challenging termination of national bank officers and voids a contractual promise to pay severance upon early termination holding that the national bank act preempts state regulation of the posting order of debit card transactions as well as any obligation to make specific affirmative disclosures to bank customers holding successor national bank liable for punitive damages judgment against bank that merged into successor national bank holding that bank had right to set off funds in a customers account against debt that the bank customer had incurred as a surety or guarantor holding that defendants position as bank vice president which allowed him knowledge of the banking system and the operations of the bank as well as the ability to oversee commercial and real estate loans and to act as a compliance officer qualified as a position of trust