The invoices provided the requisite degree of specificity inasmuch as they permitted defendant “ ‘to respond in a meaningful way on an item-by-item basis' ” (Green v. Harris Beach & Wilcox, 202 A.D.2d 993, 993, 609 N.Y.S.2d 505 ). Each invoice set forth the date of the order, the specific items ordered and delivered, the quantity ordered and delivered, as well as the price per unit and the total price for the quantity ordered (see Offset Paperback Mfrs., 47 A.D.2d at 733, 365 N.Y.S.2d 214 ; Netguistics, Inc., 23 A.D.3d at 719–720, 803 N.Y.S.2d 737 ; O'Callaghan v. Republic W. Ins. Co., 269 A.D.2d 114, 114, 701 N.Y.S.2d 898, lv. denied95 N.Y.2d 758, 713 N.Y.S.2d 522, 735 N.E.2d 1287 ; cf. Waterfront Operations Assoc., LLC v. Candino, 115 A.D.3d 1313, 1314, 983 N.Y.S.2d 168 ; Epstein, Levinsohn, Bodine, Hurwitz & Weinstein, LLP v. Shakedown Records, Ltd., 8 A.D.3d 34, 35, 777 N.Y.S.2d 633 ). Defendant was thus required to indicate specifically in its verified answer “those items [it] dispute[d] and whether in respect of delivery or performance, reasonable value or agreed price” (CPLR 3016[f] ).