debtor "cannot be viewed as 'the debtor' as that reference appears for the second time in the second sentence in subsection 554.9402(7) (Iowa stats.]." Id. at 27. This reasoning assumes two debtors though factually there is only one. The reasoning is therefore fundamentally flawed. 6 First Agri does not contend that it was actually misled by the debtors' change of name. It cites several ninth circuit cases for the proposition that a conclusion that a financing statement is "seriously misleading" does not require a finding that a creditor had actually been misled. In Re Thomas, Inc., 466 F.2d 51 (9th Cir. 1972); In Re Pacific Trencher & Equipment, Inc., 735 F.2d 362 (9th Cir. 1984). Respondents suggest that this is not a ease of a name change, but is rather a change in iden 1970) (<HOLDING>); In Re McCauley's Reprographics, Inc., 638
holding that motor vehicle to be retained by chapter 13 debtor should be valued at the price the debtor could get for it in a free and open market ie its fair market value recognizing implied duty to market holding brawns super market an insufficient listing where the debtor was wendall p brawn holding that a contract for an exclusive agency to market a product contains an implied promise to use all reasonable efforts to market the product holding that oral listing agreement did not preclude recovery of a commission