Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a lawyer if and only if x_14 will listen to a song. For all x_14, x_14 will listen to a song. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_14, neither x_14 is a lawyer nor x_14 will drive a car.
 From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a lawyer if and only if x_14 will listen to a song we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 listens to a song, then x_14 is a lawyer via existential biconditional elimination. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 listens to a song, then x_14 is a lawyer, and that for all x_14, x_14 will listen to a song we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a lawyer via existential modus ponens. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is a lawyer or x_14 will drive a car via existential addition, which contradicts that For all x_14, neither x_14 is a lawyer nor x_14 will drive a car. Therefore, the answer is no.