Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water. For all x_14, x_14 is a lawyer. For all x_14, x_14 is bored and x_14 will drive a car. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is bored and x_14 will drink water.
 From the fact that for all x_14, x_14 is bored and x_14 will drive a car we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 is bored via universal simplification. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water, and that for all x_14, x_14 is a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water and x_14 is a lawyer via existential conjunction. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water and x_14 is a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water via existential simplification. Finally, from the fact that for all x_14, x_14 is bored, and that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drink water we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is bored and x_14 will drink water via existential conjunction. Therefore, the answer is yes.