. Capitol Entm't Servs., 25 A.3d at 22 & n. 4 (citing D.C.Code § 51-110(b)(I) — (2)). 12 . Id. at 27 (footnote omitted). 13 . D.C.Code § 51-110(b)(3). [14] 14. 7 DMCR § 312.3. The regulations also provide illustrative examples of what gross misconduct may include, such as sabotage, arson, dishonesty, insubordination, repeated disregard of reasonable orders, use or possession of a controlled substance, willful destruction of property, and repeated absence or tardiness following warning. Id. §312.4. 15 . Id. §312.5. 16 . Id. 17 . Odeniran v. Hanley Wood, LLC, 985 A.2d 421, 424 (D.C.2009). 18 . Capitol Entm't Servs., Inc. v. McCormick, 25 A.3d 19, 24 (D.C.2011). 19 . Id. 20 . Hamilton v. Hojeij Branded Food, Inc., 41 A.3d 464, 476 (D.C.2012); see also Capitol Entm’t Servs., 25 A.3d at 27 (<HOLDING>); Bowman-Cook v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit
holding that an employees ordinary negligence in failing to perform work in accordance with the employers standards rules or expectations is not misconduct gross or otherwise holding that employers policy which required employee to work without pay in violation of federal law was unreasonable and employees refusal to comply was not misconduct holding that employees conviction for possession of a controlled substance constituted gross misconduct holding that employers are not liable for conduct of ordinary employees because an ordinary employees conduct will normally be so unrelated to the employers business that it cannot be deemed in furtherance thereof holding in a case in which the alj found the employer had failed to establish a rule violation under 7 dcmr  3127 but nevertheless determined the employer had established the employees gross misconduct that because there was scant evidence as to the employers written requirements pertaining to employee behavior this court could not conclude that there was substantial evidence that the employee had violated the employers rules in a manner that amounts to gross misconduct under 7 dcmr  3123