Is "in obeyance" a typo in reportage of recent Supreme court proceedings? [closed]

The term "in obeyance" seemed strange in the story reported via online outlets.

Was this mis-reported, or did they mean "in abeyance", or is this an example of American English differing from the variant on the other side of the Atlantic?

The high court said it would hold the Trump administration's request "in obeyance" to permit the district court judge to promptly consider other efforts by the administration

www.kuow.org, quoting NPR, who at the time had the same wording.

But corrected copy at NPR itself uses abeyance. The word obeyance is known as meaning "obedience", so it did not seem to make sense in the original copy.

Here is the original text from the Supreme Court's opinion in the case, which uses "abeyance":

Without indicating this Court’s views on the merits of the District Court’s order or injunction, a more comprehensive record would aid this Court’s review. The Court will therefore hold the Government’s application in abeyance to permit the District Court to promptly consider a motion by the Government to dissolve, modify, or stay the injunction, including on the ground that relevant circumstances have changed.

"Abeyance" is "a state of temporary inactivity." The Court is temporarily holding off on acting on the government's application in order to get more information. "Obeyance" would not make sense here—the Court isn't ordering anyone to do anything, so there's nothing to obey.