Cases from cite.case.law:

In Re WITEK s, 383 B.R. 323 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2007)

. . . shortfall in their budget was improperly calculated and that the “correct amount is at least positive $421.49 . . . utilized, the filing of this case must be presumed to be abusive—$5,812.74 minus $5,391.25 equals $421.49 . . . corrected, and then set against the Debtors’ permissible monthly expenses of $5,391.25, a figure of $421.49 . . . Finally, as the figure of $421.49 exceeds $182.50, the latter being the higher of the two presumptive . . .

W. RIORDAN v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 756 F. Supp. 732 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)

. . . Loss”), indicating, among other things, that plaintiffs’ loss with respect to the Contents was $147,-421.49 . . .