[CP Staging] Fix bulk delete in Search dropping deletions during confirm modal dismiss

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

Deploy blocker: on iOS, bulk-deleting expenses from the Search Spend / Expenses view no longer deleted the selected expenses. The confirm modal appeared and was confirmed, but the expenses stayed in the table (staging 9.4.26-0, not in production).

Root cause: #94171 migrated handleDeleteSelectedTransactions in useSearchBulkActions.ts off InteractionManager and, in doing so, removed the inner InteractionManager.runAfterInteractions that deferred the actual delete dispatch until after the confirm modal's dismiss interaction completed. With that deferral gone, the delete was dispatched synchronously as the modal was closing, and the deletion was dropped.

This restores the deferral around the delete dispatch so it runs after the confirm modal finishes dismissing — matching the exact behavior that ships in production today. The modal's own interaction handles are still created via InteractionManager.createInteractionHandle in ReanimatedModal, so runAfterInteractions correctly waits for the dismiss to complete. The two InteractionManager usages are annotated with // eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/no-deprecated, consistent with how ReanimatedModal already suppresses the same deprecation.

Notes

• A pre-existing local typecheck error (RilletSquare missing from an icon Record) is unrelated to this change and does not appear on origin/main; it was an artifact of a stale base and is not part of this PR's diff.
• AI checks run locally: prettier (pass), lint-changed (pass), react-compiler-compliance-check (no new errors — only pre-existing grandfathered react-hooks/refs findings), and tests/unit/hooks/useSearchBulkActionsDeleteTest.ts (2/2 pass).

Fixed Issues

$ #95114
PROPOSAL: #95114 (comment)

Tests

Suggested manual verification (iOS App):

1. Create a workspace and create an expense in the workspace chat.
2. Go to Spend / Expenses, select the expense ("1 selected").
3. Tap Delete and confirm.
4. Verify the expense is removed from the table.
5. Repeat with multiple expenses selected (bulk delete) and verify all are removed.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

1. Create a workspace and create an expense in the workspace chat.
2. Navigate to Spend / Expenses and select the expense ("1 selected").
3. Tap Delete and confirm — verify the expense is deleted from the table.
4. Verify the same for a bulk selection of multiple expenses, and for deleting whole reports.

• 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[MelvinBot]

🤖 I looked at the failing checks — neither requires a code change.

• test (job 8) — not a real test failure. Every test in the job logged PASS; the job then died with The runner has received a shutdown signal … The operation was canceled. That's a cancelled/interrupted CI runner (infrastructure), unrelated to this PR's one-file change in src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts. Per policy I don't push fixes for flaky/infra failures. Just re-run the failed job (gh run rerun 28572375918 --failed, or the "Re-run failed jobs" button) — I couldn't trigger it myself from this environment.
• checklist (PR Author Checklist) — expected. It fails until the author checklist boxes are ticked (0/41 completed). This one is human-only and can't be resolved by me.

All substantive checks passed: typecheck, ESLint, Prettier, Bun tests, React Compiler Compliance, the builds, and test jobs 1–7. So there's nothing to fix code-wise.

Evidence from the test (job 8) log

07:22:45 PASS tests/unit/ReportSelectorTest.ts (59.19 s)
07:23:16 ##[error]The runner has received a shutdown signal. This can happen when the runner service is stopped, or a manually started runner is canceled.
07:23:17 ##[error]The operation was canceled.

No FAIL / ✕ lines appear anywhere in the job — only PASS.

[melvin-bot]

@thesahindia 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]

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts	53.67% <83.33%> (+1.61%)	⬆️
... and 312 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@cretadn22 @marcochavezf One of you needs to 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]

[robertjchen]

Reviewer Checklist

• I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
• I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
  • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
  • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
  • I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
• I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • Android: HybridApp
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: HybridApp
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (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 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)
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
  • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
• 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 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.
• For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
• I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

****

[MelvinBot]

✅ All required checks are now passing — there's nothing left for me to fix.

What I found:

• The only check that was ever failing was PR Author Checklist / checklist, which is on my ignore list (it fails until the author ticks the checklist boxes). It now reports pass.
• Every blocking check is green: typecheck, ESLint check, Bun tests, all test (job N) shards, Prettier check, React Compiler Compliance, and the builds.
• A follow-up commit (0164dce — "Add justification comments to eslint-disable directives") was already pushed, so the eslint-disable directives now carry the required justifications.
• The only jobs still pending are baseline-perf-tests / branch-perf-tests, which are informational performance runs and do not block the PR.

So no additional code fix was needed. If you're still seeing a specific check red on your end, tell me which one and I'll dig in.

[github-actions]

🚧 marcochavezf 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 #95130.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-3c39afceb7b-92cbb14-381bf97ace374251421bfddeffbe1b21e6ed56b3/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-3c39afc-92cbb14-db17f2033aeb67cd2278765d1ec88f5531f58baa/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://95130.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.4.26-1 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles under App/docs/articles. No documentation updates are needed, so I did not create a draft PR.

Why: This is an internal timing/behavior bug fix. It restores an InteractionManager.runAfterInteractions deferral in src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts so that the bulk-delete dispatch runs after the confirm modal finishes dismissing — matching the behavior that already ships in production. The only user-visible effect is that bulk delete from the Search Expenses view works again on iOS (a regression fix), not any new or changed feature, UI, flow, or copy.

The help site already documents selecting and deleting expenses (e.g. Search-and-Download-Expenses.md), and that documented behavior remains accurate and unchanged. There is nothing to add or correct.

If reviewers believe the docs should explicitly describe the multi-select/bulk-delete flow in Search (a documentation gap that predates this PR rather than something introduced by it), let me know and I can scope that as a separate help site update.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/cristipaval in version: 9.4.27-1 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Help site review — no changes required

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site content under App/docs/articles.

Conclusion: No help site documentation updates are needed, so I did not open a docs PR.

Why:

• The only change is to an internal hook (src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts), restoring an InteractionManager.runAfterInteractions deferral around the delete dispatch.
• This is a regression fix that returns bulk delete in Search to the exact behavior that already ships in production — it does not add or change any user-facing feature, tab, setting, button label, or workflow.
• Help articles describe the intended behavior (deleting selected expenses from Search), which this PR restores rather than alters. The existing documentation already reflects the correct end-user behavior.

If you'd like a help article to explicitly document the Search bulk-delete flow (it isn't a change introduced here), let me know and I can scope that separately.

@marcochavezf, since no docs changes were required, there is no linked help site PR to review. Let me know if you'd like one scoped anyway.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.4.27-2 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android