The margin jumped by more than 13 times from Jan. 4, 2016, when the commerce department determined a preliminary antidumping duty of 3.51 percent for Hyundai steel products.

Hyundai has requested that the court hold the final determination unsupported by substantial record evidence and otherwise not in accordance with the law. Hyundai has also asked that Commerce’s determination be remanded for correction of error.

Hyundai alleged that the Commerce Department failed to apply the “special rule” applicable to merchandise with value added after importation to Hyundai‘s tailor-welded blanks and auto parts.

Still, the court said the department’s decision not to apply the “special rule” was reasonable.

The court also said Commerce‘s application of AFA was reasonable in regards to Hyundai’s sales of tailor-welded blanks and auto parts, but unreasonable when it came to Hyundai‘s sales of skelp, sheets and blanks (SSBs).

SSBs are products created by splitting, shearing or stamping coils of corrosion-resistant steel products.

The court said the Commerce Department’s identification of Hyundai‘s data deficiencies over its tailor-welded blanks and auto parts was timely, and it provided an opportunity to respond. But it did not identify Hyundai’s data deficiencies regarding its SSBs in a timely way.

Restani said Hyundai‘s motion for judgment on the agency record was granted, in part, and denied, in part.

“This matter is remanded for Commerce to provide Hyundai the opportunity to remedy data deficiencies as to SSBs, and to recalculate Hyundai’s antidumping margin as appropriate,” she said in her verdict, which was posted on the court‘s website. (Yonhap)