| The arrangement between an inventory secured party and its |
| debtor typically requires the secured party to make periodic |
| advances against incoming inventory or periodic releases of old |
| inventory as new inventory is received. A fraudulent debtor may |
| apply to the secured party for advances even though it has |
| already given a purchase-money security interest in the inventory |
| to another secured party. For this reason, subsections (b)(2) |
| through (4) and (c) [Maine cite subsection (2), paragraphs (b) to |
| (d) and subsection (3)] impose a second condition for the |
| purchase-money security interest's achieving priority: the |
| purchase-money secured party must give notification to the holder |
| of a conflicting security interest who filed against the same |
| item or type of inventory before the purchase-money secured party |
| filed or its security interest became perfected temporarily under |
| Section 9-312(e) or (f) [Maine cite section 9-1312, subsection |
| (5) or (6)]. The notification requirement protects the non- |
| purchase-money inventory secured party in such a situation: if |
| the inventory secured party has received notification, it |
| presumably will not make an advance; if it has not received |
| notification (or if the other security interest does not qualify |
| as purchase-money), any advance the inventory secured party may |
| make ordinarily will have priority under Section 9-322 [Maine |
| cite section 9-1322]. Inasmuch as an arrangement for periodic |
| advances against incoming goods is unusual outside the inventory |
| field, subsection (a) [Maine cite subsection (1)] does not |
| contain a notification requirement. |