televisions, screens, satellites, bingo blowers, electronic player stations, or electronic cards for participants in bingo games.” Id. § 502.7(c) (emphasis added). The current regulations seem to expressly contemplate the use of Lucky Tab II pull-tab dispensers/readers, suggesting that the NIGC has now given its imprimatur to these types of machines. Cf. Diamond Game, 230 F.3d at 369 (noting at that time that the NIGC took no official position on the Lucky Tab II’s class of gaming). Based on our review of the record and of the case law, the NIGC’s conclusion that Lucky Tab II is a permissible class II gaming device seems to be a reasonable interpretation of the IGRA. Cf. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 844, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) (<HOLDING>). III. CONCLUSION Because we conclude that the
holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference holding that sec interpretation of federal securities law is entitled to deference if it is reasonable holding that chevron deference is due only to a reasonable interpretation made by the administrator of an agency holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference holding that deference to an agency interpretation is not appropriate where a statute is administered by more than one agency