Possibly, yes, but unlikely. There are a huge number of cases on the agenda for every conference, but most of them are not discussed at all-- before each conference, each justice circulates a list of cases that they actually want to talk about. Roughly 90% of cases aren't on any justice's list, so they're "dead listed"-- they aren't discussed, and an order denying cert. is issued automatically.
So we know for a fact that at least one justice wanted to talk about this case. We also know for a fact that there were not four votes to grant cert., or cert. would have been granted. So my gut tells me that there were 1-3 votes for cert. and one or more justices who said, "maybe, let me think about it."
It's possible that the conference went on for so long that they just didn't get to this case, but I don't think that happens often.
Since you seemingly already have insight into the Court's inner workings, perhaps you'd be kind enough to answer this followup question that your explanation inevitably raises: do Justices make it a practice to discuss these cases privately in sub-groups prior to the conferences, as one would expect, or is there some rule forbidding it that is actually observed? I came at that by wondering what effect it would have, if any, on the assemblage of four votes for a case to show up on the lists of multiple judges.