I would think so. My understanding of the Lavabit case was that it was upheld on procedural grounds and thus not precedent-setting. Apple has the money and the

I would think so. My understanding of the Lavabit case was that it was upheld on procedural grounds and thus not precedent-setting. Apple has the money and the will to fight this so that it is precedent-setting* and thus usable by the not-as-expensive lawyer protecting the next Lavabit. * By which I mean I could see Apple purposefully fighting this to the Supreme Court, even if it means "appealing" a case they've already won so that it goes to a higher court.