until after the termination or expiration of the automatic stay. It follows inexorably that the district court did not err in ruling that LBM’s mortgage remains in force. Affirmed. 1 . For the sake of completeness, we note that it is unclear whether section 362(b)(3) does, in fact, apply. See In re 201 Forest St., 422 B.R. at 893 & n. 7. Given our conclusion that the statute is permissive, see text infra, we need not probe this point more deeply. 2 . We take no view as to how long LBM will have, after the lifting of the automatic stay, to commence a judicial enforcement action. Compare 11 U.S.C. § 108(c) (extending creditor's right to enforce until "30 days after notice” of expiration of automatic stay unless limitations period itself is longer), with In re Morton, 866 F.2d at 566
recognizing that under illinois law parties are free to contract for a time period within which a suit may be brought  which is less than the general statute of limitation period applicable to written contracts holding that placement of a contractual limitations period in a section entitled claims was reasonable holding that section 108c also extends time within which creditor may renew limitations period holding that limitations provision of section 1821d14 of firrea is applicable to suit on note brought by fdics assignee preempts state fouryear limitations period and extends limitation period to six years holding that the charge was timely when filed within the statute of limitations period even though served after the period