from wikipedia[1], apparently there is already quite a bit of existing caselaw for the All Writs Act: "In the case U.S. v. New York Telephone Co. 434 U.S. 159

from wikipedia[1], apparently there is already quite a bit of existing caselaw for the All Writs Act: "In the case U.S. v. New York Telephone Co. 434 U.S. 159 (1977), the Supreme Court established a three-factor test for the admissible application of the All Writs Act: the party ordered to perform an action cannot be too far removed from the case, the government's request cannot impose an undue burden on that party, and the party's assistance is necessary." My guess would be that "undue burden" is probably what the judge is pondering. Possibly "the party's assistance is necessary" (it doesn't say "convenient"!) seems interesting in this case as well, if there are other means to break into the phone (NSA, John McAfee[2]). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Writs_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Writs_Act [2]: https://www.rt.com/news/333326-mcafee-interview-fbi-apple/ https://www.rt.com/news/333326-mcafee-interview-fbi-apple/