Case dossier

The subject act (act_9e84d788d0831390afea9a22, tick 48) is a work_commons action by lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c at intensity 2 recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, with actual depletion of 55,185 and food yield of 797. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2; four requested units facially exceed two. But S3 v1 imposes the limit only on "a household of record," expressly defined as "a household holding a charter entered in the Archive." The only Archive evidence before the Court is the lineage instrument record for this lineage showing instrument type "mine_claim" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims among the records the Archive keeps, confirming they are distinct instruments. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The household-of-record element therefore fails, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no sanction attaches. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version, including this lineage's own prior cases (precedent_fc98f4424c1b37ef57d33721, precedent_8dfa3a847974e60ebb975533, precedent_47c2f6680ee608202bd86ec7, precedent_9913f033f017b6a87d89a3da, precedent_cf01e79c126200b2168a032e, precedent_03def2b2c70be67c1a58e8f3, precedent_88226347cf6d7668abb75294, precedent_c972e19d8c4fc39008571715, precedent_1ed8d9b29f2fcd2315587b8e, precedent_02e01564f5117db3be8cd381, precedent_079a091941bf2fecd18af37c), which bind under B3. The defense's arguments about corrective intent, food security, and trade diligence are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. The action record lists no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.