Update duplicate RHP screen to be more in line with other flows

[nabi-ebrahimi]

Explanation of Change

This PR refreshes the first screen of the “Review duplicates” flow so it matches the newer compact expense review patterns used elsewhere in the app. Duplicate expenses are now shown as concise selectable rows instead of large preview cards, while still letting users open each expense for full details. The screen keeps the existing product behavior: users can either keep all duplicates or select one expense to continue through the current review flow.

Fixed Issues

$ #88342
PROPOSAL: #88342 (comment)

Tests

1. Create four expenses with the same amount, each using a different merchant category and unique tags.

2. Open the expense report containing those expenses.

3. Click “Review duplicates.”

4. Verify that the RHP panel displays compact duplicate expense cards for all four expenses created in Step 1.

5. Verify that each duplicate card displays the following details:

   • Merchant
   • Date
   • Amount
   • Category

6. Verify that each duplicate card includes a selection control (radio button).

7. Verify that the bottom of the panel displays the following action buttons:

   • “Keep all”
   • “Keep selected”

8. Select one of the duplicate expenses.

9. Click “Keep selected.”

10. Continue through the duplicate resolution flow by selecting which fields to keep (for example: category, tags, and other available attributes).

11. Verify that the selected expense is retained and the remaining duplicate expenses are resolved according to the chosen options.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as test.

QA Steps

Same as test.

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Recording_20260512_191611.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Recording_20260512_193837.mp4

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-05-12.at.6.39.27.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-12.at.6.43.37.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-12.at.6.20.35.PM.mov

[melvin-bot]

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

[melvin-bot]

@sobitneupane Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ce28060cde

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ts/TransactionItemRow/TransactionItemRowNarrow.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ents/TransactionItemRow/TransactionItemRowWide.tsx	95.09% <ø> (ø)
src/components/TransactionItemRow/index.tsx	82.53% <ø> (ø)
...TransactionDuplicate/DuplicateTransactionsList.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
.../TransactionDuplicate/DuplicateTransactionItem.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/pages/TransactionDuplicate/Review.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 13 files with indirect coverage changes

[nabi-ebrahimi]

@sobitneupane I’ve addressed the AI feedback. Thanks!

Also, the ESLint failure isn’t related to this PR.

[trjExpensify]

@nabi-ebrahimi can you make sure your tests and vids cover the dupe flow where they have to pick which expense details to keep in those one-by-one screens to make sure that's QA'd and is working correctly?

CC: @dannymcclain for a looksie on this PR too!

[dannymcclain]

Looking good to me so far.

[trjExpensify]

@sobitneupane can you review this today, please?

[sobitneupane]

Yes, I will review it by EOD today.

[nabi-ebrahimi]

@sobitneupane, friendly bump. thanks.

[shawnborton]

Minor but can we check the gaps and padding on the right side?

It should be this:

[sobitneupane]

@nabi-ebrahimi It seems the UI doesn't match the expectations above. Could you please take a look and address it. Thanks.

[dannymcclain]

Agree with Shawn 👍

[nabi-ebrahimi]

@nabi-ebrahimi It seems the UI doesn't match the expectations above. Could you please take a look and address it. Thanks.

@sobitneupane, Addressed. I updated the right-side spacing so the radio now sits with ~12px from the amount/cash side and ~16px from the right edge. Could you please take another look? Thanks.

cc @deetergp

[shawnborton]

Looks better, thank you!

[deetergp]

Code looks good and tests well 👍

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🚧 @deetergp has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #89587.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-71b06e2-fdf8a2c-5e7c0434144e798272a0ed8d1325b8e7651cca29/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-71b06e2-fdf8a2c-aa8900a6f1265a5b311c560613bdf2f375c98d72/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://89587.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/deetergp in version: 9.3.79-1 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android
• iOS

[MelvinBot]

Yes, help site changes are required. The PR replaces the Keep this one button with Keep selected and changes the duplicate review flow to use selectable expense rows with radio buttons.

I've created a draft PR with the necessary updates to docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/How-to-Find-and-Resolve-Flagged-Duplicate-Expenses.md:

• Keep this one → Keep selected (button label and outcome description)
• Added a step for selecting an expense via radio button before choosing an action
• Updated keywords metadata

Draft PR: #91358

[mitarachim]

Deploy Blocker #91367 was identified to be related to this PR.

[mitarachim]

Deploy Blocker #91369 was identified to be related to this PR.

[mitarachim]

@nabi-ebrahimi This PR is failing in step 5 because of a regression issue #91374

The issue is reproducible in: Web, Android

Bug7160138_1779403791252.bandicam_2026-05-22_01-42-25-494.mp4

[mitarachim]

Deploy Blocker #91377 was identified to be related to this PR.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.79-4 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅