Consider the following premises. For all x_3, x_3 is a mechanic. There is at least one x_3 for which if x_3 were a lawyer, then x_3 is not a mechanic. For all x_3, if x_3 climbs a mountain, then x_3 is a lawyer. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_3, x_3 will climb a mountain.
 From the fact that there is at least one x_3 for which if x_3 were a lawyer, then x_3 is not a mechanic, and that for all x_3, x_3 is a mechanic we can infer that there is at least one x_3 for which x_3 is not a lawyer. Finally, from the fact that for all x_3, if x_3 climbs a mountain, then x_3 is a lawyer, and that there is at least one x_3 for which x_3 is not a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_3 for which x_3 will not climb a mountain, which contradicts that For all x_3, x_3 will climb a mountain. Therefore, the answer is no.