Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were rich, then x_9 is bored. For all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is bored. For all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is an office clerk. For all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a server. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were rich, then x_9 is a server.
 From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is bored, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is an office clerk we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk if and only if x_9 is bored. From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk if and only if x_9 is bored we can infer that for all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is an office clerk. From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is an office clerk, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a server we can infer that for all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is a server. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were rich, then x_9 is bored, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were bored, then x_9 is a server we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were rich, then x_9 is a server. Therefore, the answer is yes.