moots Weinstein’s substantive claims. IV The Weinstein firm received adequate notice of the financing agreement and its substantive objections to the agreement are moot. AFFIRMED. 1 . Two of our sister circuits have adopted our approach. See In re Ellingsen MacLean Oil Co., Inc., 834 F.2d 599, 600-01 (6th Cir.1987) (where a bank extended post-petition financing in return for the waiver of any right to challenge its pre-petition liens, extending the protection of § 364(e) to both the post-petition debt and the waiver); In re Reveo D.S., Inc., 901 F.2d 1359, 1364 (6th Cir.1990) (explaining that in "reviewing financing orders subject to section 364(e) [courts] have been reluctant to sever individual provisions”); In re Western Pacific Airlines, Inc., 181 F.3d 1191, 1195 (10th Cir. 1999) (<HOLDING>). But see Matter of Saybrook Mfg. Co., Inc.,
holding that a mortgage took priority over a judgment lien under real prop  3201 where the mortgage had been executed before but recorded after the institution of a lawsuit to obtain the judgment lien holding that a property right that comes into existence by court action such as a judgment lien does not relate back to some earlier date to destroy the priority of a federal tax lien holding that a judgment resolving the question of the priority of the federal tax lien   constitutes a final and appealable order over which we have jurisdiction holding that   364e prohibits not only outright invalidation of a lien or priority  but also modification of the terms holding that the lien bond releases the property from the lien but the lien is then secured by the bond