Case dossier

The subject is a work_commons action at tick 25 by lineage_6c32fe69b100ea6ce44ed858 recording requested 6,000,000 millionths, i.e. 6 recorded units, against S3 v1's operative limit of 2 units. Under B3 the act is judged under the versions effective at tick 25, S3 v1 and S4 v1. The defense's contention that only actual depletion (62,084) or yield (965) counts is rejected as a matter of construction: S3 governs what a household "may request," and S4 measures restoration by "excess request" capped by attributed depletion, confirming the request figure is the regulated quantity. Good faith, inherited lessons, and survival need are not defenses in the text. Nonetheless the charge fails on the predicate element. S3 imposes its limit only on a "household of record," expressly defined as "a household holding a charter entered in the Archive." The only evidence of the lineage's Archive standing is an archive_lineage_instrument record whose instrument field reads "mine_claim," entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists "charters, claims, and published judgments," so a mine_claim is not a charter, and nothing else in the canonical input records a charter for this lineage; I may not infer unavailable facts. This is materially similar to the published constructions in precedent_831ca18856a72d3b2ad5da69, precedent_194da607b649206a7be4d3e3, and precedent_5703e268875a40a417b60895, all under S3 v1, which B3 makes binding. The definitional element therefore fails, no S3 violation is established, and no S4 restoration, fine, suspension, or disqualification arises. No remedy offers were supplied.