Consider the following premises. For all x_16, if x_16 were bored, then x_16 is working. For all x_16, x_16 is bored. There is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 works, then x_16 is bored. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_16, neither x_16 will work nor x_16 is a janitor.
 From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 were bored, then x_16 is working, and that there is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 works, then x_16 is bored we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is bored if and only if x_16 will work. From the fact that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is bored if and only if x_16 will work we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 were bored, then x_16 is working. From the fact that there is at least one x_16 for which if x_16 were bored, then x_16 is working, and that for all x_16, x_16 is bored we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 will work. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 will work we can infer that there is at least one x_16 for which x_16 will work or x_16 is a janitor, which contradicts that For all x_16, neither x_16 will work nor x_16 is a janitor. Therefore, the answer is no.