Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 cooks, then x_9 is a lawyer. For all x_9, x_9 will not take a plane. For all x_9, if x_9 takes a plane, then x_9 is a lawyer. For all x_9, x_9 will take a plane if and only if x_9 is a lawyer. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_9 for which x_9 will not cook.
 From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 will take a plane if and only if x_9 is a lawyer we can infer that for all x_9, if x_9 were a lawyer, then x_9 is taking a plane. From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 takes a plane, then x_9 is a lawyer, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were a lawyer, then x_9 is taking a plane we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 will take a plane if and only if x_9 is a lawyer. From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 will take a plane if and only if x_9 is a lawyer, and that for all x_9, x_9 will not take a plane we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 is not a lawyer. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 cooks, then 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 will not cook. Therefore, the answer is yes.