UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Federal Trade Commission

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580

Office of the Chair

Joint Statement of Chair Lina M. Khan, 

Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, and Commissioner Alvaro M. Bedoya 

In the Matter of Resident Home LLC

Commission File No. 2023179 

June 22, 2022 

Today, the Commission votes to enter the settlement order with Resident Home for false 

made in the USA claims, in violation of Section 5. A majority of Commissioners voted for this 

initial settlement in October and published a statement in support.1 We now vote to enter into

this final settlement.

Resident Home is the parent company of Nectar Sleep, a repeat offender already under

order for false made in the USA claims.2 Because Resident Home is a newly-created corporate 

parent of Nectar Sleep, an action for order violation directly against Resident Home would have 

been fraught with legal uncertainty. Instead, Commission staff pursued a de novo settlement 

against Resident Home, which now covers Resident Home and all of its subsidiaries, prohibits

them from making unsubstantiated claims, and requires them to pay $753,000 in monetary relief 

pursuant to a Section 19 damages theory. 

Commissioners Phillips and Wilson vote against a settlement because they believe that 

staff could not prove that Resident Home consumers suffered $753,000 in damages, and so the 

settlement illegally requires the monetary relief beyond the Commission’s statutory authority. 

We disagree. For the reasons stated in the previous majority statement, Section 19 is the correct

vehicle to require monetary relief in this matter and the quantity of monetary relief agreed on by 

the parties is appropriate to “redress injury.”3In any case, our dissenting colleagues dispute 

neither that the Commission was entitled to monetary relief (which they would have sought as 

civil penalties through an order enforcement action4) nor injunctive relief for Resident Home 

(which they agree can be done through an administrative action5).

1 Joint Statement of Chair Lina Khan, Commissioner Rohit Chopra, and Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter In 

the Matter of Resident Home LLC (hereinafter “Original Joint Statement”) (Oct. 8, 2021), 

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1597282/2023179khanslaughterchopraresidenthome

statement.pdf. 2 Fed. Trade Comm’n, In the Matter of Nectar Brand LLC (Sept. 12, 2018), https://www.ftc.gov/legallibrary/browse/cases-proceedings/182-3038-nectar-brand-llc-matter. 3 15 U.S.C. § 57b(b). See also Original Joint Statement at 2; Statement of Commissioner Rohit Chopra at 3 (Oct. 8, 

2021), 

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1597266/chopra_statement_on_resident_home.pdf. 4 Dissenting Statement of Commissioners Noah Joshua Phillips and Christine S. Wilson In the Matter of Resident 

Home LLC (observing that the Commission “could choose to pursue an order enforcement action in federal court 

and seek civil penalties”), 

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1597270/resident_home_dissenting_statement_wilso

n_and_phillips_final_0.pdf. 5 Id. (observing that the Commission “could choose to pursue a de novo administrative action and seek a new 

order”).
2

We support staff’s proposed resolution of this matter. In light of the dramatically

changing legal landscape, including the Supreme Court’s decision in AMG6 and recent appellate 

decisions,7 staff is operating under extraordinarily demanding conditions. We believe the result 

in this matter reflects Commission staff at its best, and we gladly vote to enter the settlement in 

this matter.

***

6 AMG Capital Mgmt. v. Fed. Trade Comm’n, 141 S. Ct. 1341 (2021). 7 See, e.g., Jarkesy v. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n., 34 F.4th 446 (5th Cir. 2022).