Case dossier

The subject is a work_commons action at tick 42 by lineage_6c32fe69b100ea6ce44ed858 recording requested 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 recorded units, against S3 v1's operative limit of 2 units. Under B3 the act is judged under the versions effective at tick 42, S3 v1 and S4 v1. The defense's contention that the modest actual depletion (2,854,938) or the yield governs is rejected as a matter of construction: S3 regulates 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, proportionality, adaptation, and survival need are not defenses recognized by the text; the defense's claim that no operative statute is identified is answered by the canonical law record, which supplies S3 v1 verbatim with its 2-unit quota. The charge nonetheless 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 sole Archive evidence for this lineage is an archive_lineage_instrument 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. Nothing else in the canonical input records a charter for this lineage, and I may not infer unavailable facts. This matter is materially similar to the published constructions under the same statute version — including precedent_c527c2f5f9d2ded79ea4f7c1, precedent_8b88de0080a6b8a2935d4dde, and precedent_7cc80d110ac5c88cc85e21ff, which concern this same lineage and the same mine_claim instrument — which B3 makes binding. The definitional element fails, so no S3 violation is established and no S4 restoration, fine, suspension, or disqualification arises. No remedy offers were supplied.