Consider the following premises. For all x_6, x_6 will cook if and only if x_6 will play tennis. For all x_6, x_6 will cook or x_6 will not drive a car. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_6 for which the fact that x_6 drives a car does not imply that x_6 is playing tennis.
 From the fact that for all x_6, x_6 will cook or x_6 will not drive a car we can infer that for all x_6, if x_6 drives a car, then x_6 is cooking. From the fact that for all x_6, x_6 will cook if and only if x_6 will play tennis we can infer that for all x_6, if x_6 cooks, then x_6 is playing tennis. Finally, from the fact that for all x_6, if x_6 drives a car, then x_6 is cooking, and that for all x_6, if x_6 cooks, then x_6 is playing tennis we can infer that for all x_6, if x_6 drives a car, then x_6 is playing tennis, which contradicts that There is at least one x_6 for which the fact that x_6 drives a car does not imply that x_6 is playing tennis. Therefore, the answer is no.