Consider the following premises. For all x_11, if x_11 were excited, then x_11 is a lawyer. For all x_11, if x_11 were a mechanic, then x_11 is a server. There is at least one x_11 for which if x_11 were a server, then x_11 is excited. For all x_11, x_11 is excited or x_11 is not a lawyer. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_11, the fact that x_11 were a mechanic does not imply that x_11 is a lawyer.
That contradicts the premises. Therefore the answer is no.