547(c)(2)(A). 32 . In re First Jersey, 180 F.3d at 512; Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Brown (In re Cherrydale Farms, Inc.), Adv. Pro. No. 99-328, 2001 Bankr.LEXIS 156, at *9 (Bankr.D.Del.2001). 33 . First Jersey, 180 F.3d at 512. 34 . Miller v. Westfield Steel, Inc. (In re Elrod Holdings Corp.), 426 B.R. 106, 110-11 (Bankr.D.Del.2010). 35 . In re Molded Acoustical Products, Inc., 18 F. e parties’ relationship began on October 16, 2006 and continued through the Petition Date (October 6, 2008). The evidence supports that there were 107 payments in the Historical Period and 10 payments in the Preference Period. 44 . Patterson Dec. at ¶ 14. 45 . Patterson Dec. at ¶ 20 and Troisio Dec. at ¶ 26. See Fonda Group v. Marcus Travel (In re Fonda Group), 108 B.R. 956, 961 (Bankr.D.N.J.1989) (<HOLDING>). 46 . Radnor Holdings Corp. v. PPT Consulting,
holding that the average number of days to payment nearly doubled between the historical period and the preference period which based on the facts of that particular case made the payments outside the ordinary course of dealings between the plaintiff and defendant holding that drawer of check is liable only for the amount originally stated by drawer on check even though the drawers negligence facilitated the wrongful alteration of the amount on the check and the payment of a larger amount to the payee holding that a payment made by certified check rather than the customary regular check was outside the ordinary course of dealings between the parties holding that the parties relationship was not lengthy enough to establish an ordinary course of dealings as the first transaction between the parties was subject to the preference action holding that an assignment was recognized by the government because the government issued a check made payable to the assignee as payment under the contract