Dale is a retired law professor turned wheat farmer who is filing for bankruptcy. Prior to filing, Dale made the following transactions. In none of the following transactions did the Secured Party file a financing statement.

In transaction #1, Dale granted a security interest in the trophy for his Kemper Teaching Award, granting that interest to Joe’s Pawn in return for a $1,000 loan. The trophy is still in the possession of Joe’s Pawn.

In transaction #2, Dale took this year’s harvest of grain to the Wheat Warehouse for storage until it could be sold. Wheat Warehouse issued Dale a document properly describing the quantity and quality of the grain Dale delivered. Bank then loaned Dale $100,000 after Dale signed a properly drafted security agreement giving Bank a security interest in the written document given to him by Wheat Warehouse. Bank took possession of the document.

In transaction #3, Dale made two separate purchases for his home (a 40-inch TV, and a sofa) on secured installment sales contracts from Shady Furniture Company. According to the contracts he signed, both the TV and the sofa not only secure repayment of their respective purchase prices, but also all other sums Dale owes to Shady. Dale lives in a jurisdiction that has, at common law, followed the “transformation rule.”

In which of the above transactions would Dale’s creditor not have a properly perfected security interest?

(a) Transaction #1

(b) Transaction #2

(c) Transaction #3

(d) All of the Above

(e) None of the Above