Consider the following premises. For all x_16, if x_16 goes running, then x_16 is a taxi driver. For all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is running. For all x_16, x_16 is a taxi driver if and only if x_16 will play tennis. For all x_16, x_16 will take a plane. For all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain or x_16 is a janitor. For all x_16, x_16 will not play tennis. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_16, x_16 will take a plane and x_16 is a janitor.
 From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a taxi driver if and only if x_16 will play tennis, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not play tennis we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is not a taxi driver via universal biconditional elimination. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is running, and that for all x_16, if x_16 goes running, then x_16 is a taxi driver we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is a taxi driver via universal transitivity. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 climbs a mountain, then x_16 is a taxi driver, and that for all x_16, x_16 is not a taxi driver we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain via universal modus tollens. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will climb a mountain or x_16 is a janitor, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not climb a mountain we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is a janitor via universal disjunctive syllogism. Finally, from the fact that for all x_16, x_16 will take a plane, and that for all x_16, x_16 is a janitor we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will take a plane and x_16 is a janitor via universal conjunction. Therefore, the answer is yes.