The purposes of the sum certain requirement are to facilitate settlement and to inform the agency whether the claim exceeds $25,000 and therefore requires the approval of the Attorney General in order to settle. Lundgren v. United States, 810 F.Supp. 256, 258 (D.Minn.1992). The January administrative claim stated a sum certain. The fact that the January claim stated a damage figure greater than the figure quoted in the November claim is not important. While special restrictions exist when a claimant seeks to increase the amount of his claim, McMichael v. United States, 856 F.2d 1026, 1035 (8th Cir.1988), no such restrictions exist on a claimant’s ability to decrease the amount for which he is seeking compensation. See Lunsford v. United States, 570 F.2d 221, 222-24 (8th Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>). . Furthermore, it is not determinative that
holding that the right to nominal damages for race discrimination claims can be waived if such damages are not timely requested holding individual named claimants had satisfied the presentment requirements of section 2675a even though they requested damages in court which were 1168500 less than the damages requested in thenadministrative claims holding that the right to nominal damages for eighth amendment violations can be waived if such damages are not timely requested holding that a plaintiff could recover actual damages under the tcpa for loss of credit if the plaintiff submitted sufficient proof of the amount damages requested holding that plaintiff waived the right to nominal damages in an excessive force case because nominal damages were not requested until after the verdict