Consider the following premises. For all x_10, if x_10 were sad, then x_10 is a server. There is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were a server, then x_10 is a writer. For all x_10, x_10 will drive a car. For all x_10, x_10 is sad. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_10, x_10 is not a writer.
 From the fact that for all x_10, x_10 is sad, and that for all x_10, x_10 will drive a car we can infer that for all x_10, x_10 is sad and x_10 will drive a car. From the fact that for all x_10, x_10 is sad and x_10 will drive a car we can infer that for all x_10, x_10 is sad. From the fact that for all x_10, if x_10 were sad, then x_10 is a server, and that there is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were a server, then x_10 is a writer we can infer that there is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were sad, then x_10 is a writer. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were sad, then x_10 is a writer, and that for all x_10, x_10 is sad we can infer that there is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a writer, which contradicts that For all x_10, x_10 is not a writer. Therefore, the answer is no.