Expert Q&A Done Appliance Master, LLC-Patent Defense Case Appliance Master, LLC (AM) created a household appliance that was especialhy effective in attracting and killing flying insects. The basic appliance had been invented in Asia over 10 years earlier and the Asian inventors were unsuccessful in obtaining a patent on the basic appliance. AM had brought the appliance to the USA and had made an improvement for which AM applied for and obtained a patent. The improvement was the addition of an air actuated damper that kept live insects from escaping before they dehydrated and died. AM had grown in its 5-year life to a company with current sales of $15 million annually Pest-Be-Gone, Inc. (PBG) was a competitor of AM with a bad reputation for stealing inventions of their competitors In one case PG infiringed the patent of Big Gun, Inc. (BGL, a $70 million company in the pest control industry. 8G took P8G to court for patent infringement and won a $so0,000 award aher spending $2 million in court and attorney costs to deflend its patent (or a met loss on the transaction of $1.5 million PBG copied AM's air actuated damper in products that , is arrently seli AM asked its patent attorney to send a cease and desist letter to P8G Three weeks after the cease and desist letter was sent, PBG sent a letter to AMl enclosing documents advising that a suit in federal court had been fled against AM to invalidate AM's patent on the grounds that AM did not ile its patent application within the one year time limit after pubilic disclosure of the invention P8G cited AM's dated web site that showed AM's appliance over one year earler than the patent application date. AM claims that its filing was timely and that the product in the web site was the model that existed before the air damper was included. However, AM believed that it would be difficult to prove that the air damper was included in public disclosures only within the 1 year time limit As the entrepreneur owner of AM, what would you do