The second sentence of subsection (b) [Maine cite subsection (2)] effectively limits the applicability of the first sentence to situations in which a new debtor has become bound by more than one security agreement entered into by the same original debtor. When the new debtor has become bound by security agreements entered into by different original debtors, the second sentence provides that priority is based on priority in time of the new debtor's becoming bound.

Example 5: Under the facts of Example 2, SP-W holds a perfected-by-filing security interest in W Corp's existing and after-acquired inventory. After Z Corp became bound by X Corp's security agreement in favor of SP-X, Z Corp became bound by W Corp's security agreement. Under subsection (b) [Maine cite subsection (2)], SP-W's security interest in inventory acquired by Z Corp is subordinate to that of SP-X, because Z Corp became bound under SP-X's security agreement before it became bound under SP-W's security agreement. This is the result regardless of which financing statement (SP-X's or SP-W's) was filed first.

The second sentence of subsection (b) [Maine cite subsection (2)] reflects the generally accepted view that priority based on the first-to-file rule is inappropriate for resolving priority disputes when the filings were made against different debtors. Like subsection (a) [Maine cite subsection (1)] and the first sentence of subsection (b) [Maine cite subsection (2)], however, the second sentence of subsection (b) [Maine cite subsection (2)] relates only to priority conflicts among security interests perfected by filed financing statements that are "effective solely under Section 9508 [Maine cite section 9-1508]."

Example 6: Under the facts of Example 5, after Z Corp became bound by W Corp's security agreement, SP-W promptly filed a new initial financing statement against Z Corp. At that time, SP-X's security interest was perfected only pursuant to its original filing against X Corp which was "effective solely under Section 9508 [Maine cite section 9-1508]." Because SP-W's security interest is not perfected by a financing statement that is "effective solely under Section 9-508," this section does not apply to the priority contest. Rather, the normal priority rules apply. Under Section 9-322 [Maine cite section 9-1322], because SP-W's financing statement was the first to be filed against Z