Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is a taxi driver if and only if x_9 is an office clerk. For all x_9, if x_9 were a cashier, then x_9 is a taxi driver. For all x_9, x_9 is an electrician or x_9 is an office clerk. For all x_9, x_9 is not an electrician. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_9, x_9 is not a taxi driver.
 From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 is an electrician or x_9 is an office clerk, and that for all x_9, x_9 is not an electrician we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk. From the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is a taxi driver if and only if x_9 is an office clerk we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a taxi driver. From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk or x_9 is a cashier. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 were an office clerk, then x_9 is a taxi driver, that for all x_9, if x_9 were a cashier, then x_9 is a taxi driver, and that for all x_9, x_9 is an office clerk or x_9 is a cashier we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is a taxi driver, which contradicts that For all x_9, x_9 is not a taxi driver. Therefore, the answer is no.