Consider the following premises. For all x_5, if x_5 takes a plane, then x_5 is reading a book. For all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is taking a plane. For all x_5, if x_5 takes a plane, then x_5 is playing squash. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 plays squash does not imply that x_5 is reading a book.
 From the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is taking a plane, and that for all x_5, if x_5 takes a plane, then x_5 is playing squash we can infer that for all x_5, x_5 will play squash if and only if x_5 will take a plane. From the fact that for all x_5, x_5 will play squash if and only if x_5 will take a plane we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is taking a plane. Finally, from the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is taking a plane, and that for all x_5, if x_5 takes a plane, then x_5 is reading a book we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is reading a book, which contradicts that There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 plays squash does not imply that x_5 is reading a book. Therefore, the answer is no.