Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 works, then x_9 is playing squash. For all x_9, if x_9 plays squash, then x_9 is working. For all x_9, if x_9 goes running, then x_9 is working. For all x_9, x_9 will go running. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_9, x_9 will not work.
 From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 plays squash, then x_9 is working, and that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 works, then x_9 is playing squash we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 will play squash if and only if x_9 will work. From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 will go running we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 will go running or x_9 will play squash. From the fact that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 will play squash if and only if x_9 will work we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 plays squash, then x_9 is working. Finally, from the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 goes running, then x_9 is working, that there is at least one x_9 for which if x_9 plays squash, then x_9 is working, and that for all x_9, x_9 will go running or x_9 will play squash we can infer that there is at least one x_9 for which x_9 will work, which contradicts that For all x_9, x_9 will not work. Therefore, the answer is no.