Consider the following premises. forall x_16: P_16(x_16) -> Q_16(x_16). forall x_16: P_16(x_16). forall x_16: ~P_13(x_16). exists x_16: R(x_16). forall x_16: P_13(x_16) or P(x_16). Can we infer forall x_16: ~(P(x_16) and R(x_16)) from them?
 From forall x_16: P_16(x_16) -> Q_16(x_16), forall x_16: P_16(x_16) we can infer forall x_16: Q_16(x_16). From forall x_16: P_13(x_16) or P(x_16), forall x_16: ~P_13(x_16) we can infer forall x_16: P(x_16). From exists x_16: R(x_16), forall x_16: Q_16(x_16) we can infer exists x_16: R(x_16) and Q_16(x_16). From exists x_16: R(x_16) and Q_16(x_16) we can infer exists x_16: R(x_16). Finally, from forall x_16: P(x_16), exists x_16: R(x_16) we can infer exists x_16: P(x_16) and R(x_16), which contradicts forall x_16: ~(P(x_16) and R(x_16)). Therefore, the answer is no.