| 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. |