Nov 24 (Reuters) - A federal judge in Los Angeles on

Monday dismissed Ford's lawsuit accusing several

California lawyers and law firms of fraudulently inflating their

legal fees under the state's Lemon Law, including allegations

that a single lawyer billed more than 57 hours in one day.

U.S. District Judge Michelle Williams Court ruled that the

Knight Law Group and its co-defendants were protected by a legal

doctrine called Noerr-Pennington immunity, which bars antitrust

claims against parties that are petitioning the government even

if they are advocating for government action that would reduce

competition.

The judge also ruled that Ford's claim under the federal

anti-racketeering law known as RICO was deficient.

"Knight Law will never be deterred by attempts to chill its

advocacy, and it will now go back to doing what it does best:

protecting the American people," said Neal Katyal, a Milbank

partner and former acting U.S. solicitor general who is

representing the Knight Law Group and its lawyers.

A spokesperson for Ford and attorneys for the other defendants,

including the Altman Law Group and Wirtz Law, did not

immediately respond to requests for comment.

Court said she would give Ford another chance to revive its

claims against the defendants, and gave the Dearborn,

Michigan-based automaker until Dec. 22 to re-file its lawsuit.

California's Lemon Law, the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty

Act, lets lawyers collect legal fees based on reasonably

incurred time spent representing vehicle owners.

Ford accused the defendants of defrauding several carmakers

by submitting false and inflated fee applications and demands,

and alleged that the Knight Law Group's Steve Mikhov was the

"ringleader of this criminal enterprise."

Mikhov, a named defendant in the case, and the Knight Law Group

denied Ford's allegations in a Sept. 12 filing, calling the

lawsuit an effort "to chill and punish its litigation

adversaries - law firms, lawyers, and staff who represent

consumers harmed by Ford's defective vehicles and fraudulent

conduct."

Ford alleged that there were "numerous" alleged instances

of lawyers billing more than 24 hours in a day. One partner at

the Knight Law Group, Amy Morse, billed 57-1/2 hours of work on

one day, the carmaker alleged.

Ford later claimed that the Knight Law Group had begun

withdrawing certain demands for payment as a way to "to cover

their tracks and conceal their fraudulent conduct."

The Knight Law Group said Ford's lawsuit suggested that

Morse "did not know any such time entries were included in fee

petitions." The firm also said that the carmaker's lawsuit was

filled with "with wholly irrelevant (and inaccurate) personal

attacks" on the defendants.

The legal battle attracted several high-profile firms. Ford

was represented by a team of attorneys from Kasowitz, while the

Knight Law Group tapped lawyers from Milbank; Williams &

Connolly; and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman.

The case is Ford Motor Co ( F ) v. Knight Law Group LLP, U.S.

District Court for the Central District of California, No.

25-04550.

For Ford: Daniel Saunders, Matthew Manacek, Edward McNally

and Daniel Fetterman of Kasowitz

For Knight Law Group et al: Neal Katyal, Matthew LaRoche of

Milbank; Dane Butswinkas and Zachary Warren of Williams &

Connolly; and Aaron Dyer, and Ronald Cheng of Pillsbury Winthrop

Shaw Pittman

For Amy Morse: Kendall Waters and Pamela Johnston of Foley &

Lardner

For The Altman Law Group and Bryan Altman: Gregor Hensrude

of Klinedinst

For Wirtz Law et al: John Quinn and Matthew Craig of Hecker

Fink