Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/13-534_19m2.pdf
Page Number: 9

4 

NORTH CAROLINA STATE BD. OF DENTAL
EXAMINERS v. FTC 

Opinion of the Court 

administrative  complaint  charging  the  Board  with  violat­
ing §5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 719,
as  amended,  15  U. S. C.  §45.    The  FTC  alleged  that  the 
Board’s  concerted  action  to  exclude  nondentists  from  the 
market  for  teeth  whitening  services  in  North  Carolina
constituted an anticompetitive and unfair method of com­
petition.  The  Board  moved  to  dismiss,  alleging  state-
action  immunity.  An  Administrative  Law  Judge  (ALJ) 
denied  the  motion.  On  appeal,  the  FTC  sustained  the
ALJ’s  ruling.    It  reasoned  that,  even  assuming  the  Board 
had acted pursuant to a clearly articulated state policy to 
displace  competition,  the  Board  is  a  “public/private  hy­
brid”  that  must  be  actively  supervised  by  the  State  to 
claim  immunity.    App.  to  Pet.  for  Cert.  49a.    The  FTC 
further concluded the Board could not make that showing. 
Following  other  proceedings  not  relevant  here,  the  ALJ 
conducted  a  hearing  on  the  merits  and  determined  the 
Board  had  unreasonably  restrained  trade  in  violation  of
antitrust  law.    On  appeal,  the  FTC  again  sustained  the 
ALJ.  The FTC rejected the Board’s public safety justifica­
tion,  noting,  inter  alia,  “a  wealth  of  evidence  . . .  suggest­
ing  that  non-dentist  provided  teeth  whitening  is  a  safe
cosmetic procedure.”  Id., at 123a. 

The  FTC  ordered  the  Board  to  stop  sending  the  cease­
and-desist  letters  or  other  communications  that  stated 
nondentists  may  not  offer  teeth  whitening  services  and 
products.  It further ordered the Board to issue notices to 
all earlier recipients of the Board’s cease-and-desist orders 
advising  them  of  the  Board’s  proper  sphere  of  authority 
and saying, among other options, that the notice recipients
had a right to seek declaratory rulings in state court.

On  petition  for  review,  the  Court  of  Appeals  for  the 
Fourth Circuit affirmed the FTC in all respects.  717 F. 3d 
359, 370 (2013).  This Court granted certiorari.  571 U. S. 
___ (2014).