Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were a server, then x_9 is a lawyer. For all x_9, if x_9 were a lawyer, then x_9 is a server. For all x_9, x_9 is not a lawyer. For all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a server. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not an office clerk.
 From the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were a server, then x_9 is a lawyer, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were a lawyer, then x_9 is a server we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is a server if and only if x_9 is a lawyer. From the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is a server if and only if x_9 is a lawyer, and that for all x_9, x_9 is not a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not a server. Finally, from the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a server, and that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not a server we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not an office clerk. Therefore, the answer is yes.