Consider the following premises. For all x_7, x_7 is a poet if and only if x_7 is a doctor. For all x_7, if x_7 were a doctor, then x_7 is a lawyer. For all x_7, if x_7 makes tea, then x_7 is a poet. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_7 for which the fact that x_7 makes tea does not imply that x_7 is a lawyer.
 From the fact that for all x_7, x_7 is a poet if and only if x_7 is a doctor we can infer that for all x_7, if x_7 were a poet, then x_7 is a doctor. From the fact that for all x_7, if x_7 makes tea, then x_7 is a poet, and that for all x_7, if x_7 were a poet, then x_7 is a doctor we can infer that for all x_7, if x_7 makes tea, then x_7 is a doctor. Finally, from the fact that for all x_7, if x_7 makes tea, then x_7 is a doctor, and that for all x_7, if x_7 were a doctor, then x_7 is a lawyer we can infer that for all x_7, if x_7 makes tea, then x_7 is a lawyer, which contradicts that There is at least one x_7 for which the fact that x_7 makes tea does not imply that x_7 is a lawyer. Therefore, the answer is no.