AB 2290: Civil discovery: oral depositions: transcriptions. - California

08/30/26 - Enrolled → AB2290 · 1 edit

MINOR

No substantive policy changes were made between these two versions. The diff reflects a change in presentation format: the first version is the formal enrolled legislative document (with chapter number, governor's signature block, and traditional formatting), while the second is a web page rendering of the same bill text with navigation elements, metadata, and status information added.

TECHNICAL

The bill text was reformatted from a formal enrolled document layout to a web-based display format. All substantive provisions of Section 2025.550 (electronic transmission of deposition transcripts, encryption requirements, authentication standards, and court acceptance) remain identical between versions.

08/18/26 - Amended Senate → 08/30/26 - Enrolled · 2 edits · Aug 30, 2026

MINOR

AB 2290 moved from its amended Senate version to the enrolled (final) version ready for the Governor's signature. The only substantive policy change is a correction in subdivision (a)(3): the phrase 'A court shall may accept' was corrected to 'A court may accept,' making it discretionary rather than mandatory for courts to treat electronically transmitted deposition transcripts as original certified transcripts. All other changes are formatting updates consistent with the transition to enrolled bill form.

REQUIREMENT

Subdivision (a)(3) changed from 'A court shall may accept' to 'A court may accept,' correcting a drafting error and making it discretionary (rather than mandatory) for courts to accept electronically transmitted, formatted, stored, and certified deposition transcripts as original certified transcripts kept under seal.

TECHNICAL

The legislative counsel's digest was corrected from 'This bill would require authorize the court to accept' to 'This bill would authorize the court to accept,' removing a redundant word that reflected the same drafting error.

08/03/26 - Amended Senate → 08/18/26 - Amended Senate · 3 edits · Aug 18, 2026

MINOR

The August 18 amendment makes two substantive policy changes to AB 2290's electronic deposition transcript provisions. First, it changes court acceptance of compliant electronic transcripts from mandatory to discretionary, giving courts the option rather than the obligation to accept them as original certified transcripts. Second, it removes explicit language stating that a certified electronic transcript is admissible as an original, leaving admissibility to be determined through other evidentiary rules.

REQUIREMENT

Court acceptance of electronically transmitted deposition transcripts changed from mandatory ('shall accept') to permissive ('may accept'), giving judges discretion rather than imposing a duty to treat compliant electronic transcripts as originals.

ENFORCEMENT

Removed the explicit statement that a certified electronic transcript 'shall be admissible as an original transcript' when presented to court, eliminating a guaranteed evidentiary status for electronic transcripts.

SCOPE

Changed 'attorney parties and the court' to 'parties and the court' in the verification requirement, broadening who can verify the authenticity of an electronic transcript beyond just attorneys to include all parties to the action.

06/11/26 - Amended Senate → 08/03/26 - Amended Senate · 6 edits · Aug 3, 2026

MODERATE

The August 3 amendment significantly expands who may transmit deposition transcripts electronically, adding registered transcription entities alongside deposition officers. It also adds specific encryption standards (end-to-end or at-rest/in-transit), a notification requirement to other parties, and a mandatory obligation for courts to accept compliant electronic transcripts as originals. These changes make the electronic transcript system more robust and broader in applicability.

Scope change

The bill's scope broadened to include registered transcription and reporting entities (under B&P Code Section 8051) as authorized transmitters of electronic deposition transcripts, in addition to the deposition officer. The court acceptance provision also expands applicability by making it a mandatory obligation on all courts.

SCOPE

Registered entities under Business and Professions Code Section 8051 (transcription/reporting service providers) are now permitted to transmit certified deposition transcripts electronically, not just the deposition officer.

REQUIREMENT

Encryption requirements were made more specific: transmission must use end-to-end encryption or an application providing at minimum encryption of the file while at rest and in transit, replacing the prior general reference to an 'encrypted format.'

A new notification requirement obligates the deposition officer or registered entity to notify other parties that the certified transcript will be transmitted electronically.

The format requirement was strengthened from merely enabling verification of authenticity to also preventing modification of the transcript or any aspect of the file.

ENFORCEMENT

A new provision (subdivision a(3)) requires courts to accept a compliant electronic transcript as an original certified transcript kept under seal, making court acceptance mandatory rather than discretionary.

ELIGIBILITY

Storage responsibility for protecting the transcript against loss, destruction, or tampering was expanded from 'the attorney' to 'the attorney or party.'

03/02/26 - Amended Assembly → 06/11/26 - Amended Senate · 3 edits · Jun 11, 2026

MINOR

The Senate amendment narrowed the bill's scope by removing all amendments to Section 2025.510 (which covered transcription requirements, cost allocation, stenographic note retention, audio/video access, and payment provisions), leaving only the amendment to Section 2025.550 on transcript transmission. The remaining provision was strengthened to require encrypted electronic transmission in a format that verifies authenticity, and a new admissibility rule was added making electronically transmitted transcripts admissible as originals when the presenting attorney certifies them as true and correct copies.

SCOPE

All amendments to Section 2025.510 of the Code of Civil Procedure were removed, eliminating proposed changes to transcription requirements, cost allocation for transcription, retention periods for stenographic notes, access to audio/video recordings, payment obligations for deposition services, and related definitions.

REQUIREMENT

Electronic transmission of deposition transcripts now requires an encrypted format and a format that enables the attorney and court to verify the transcript is authentic and has not been altered after certification by the deposition officer.

ENFORCEMENT

A new provision requires an attorney presenting an electronically stored transcript to a court to certify it is a true and correct copy of what was received electronically, and establishes that such a transcript is admissible as an original transcript.

02/19/26 - Introduced → 03/02/26 - Amended Assembly · 3 edits · Mar 2, 2026

MINOR

AB 2290 was amended to add a new provision (Section 2025.550) that allows deposition officers to transmit certified deposition transcripts electronically to the noticing party's attorney upon request, rather than only via physical sealed envelope. The amendment also makes minor technical corrections to existing Section 2025.510 language. This modernizes how deposition transcripts are delivered in civil litigation.

REQUIREMENT

Added new text amending Section 2025.550 of the Code of Civil Procedure establishing that certified deposition transcripts shall not be filed with the court, must be securely sealed and transmitted to the noticing party's attorney, and may be transmitted electronically upon request by that attorney. The receiving attorney must store the transcript under conditions protecting it against loss, destruction, or tampering, and retain custody until six months after final disposition of the action.

TECHNICAL

Corrected a drafting error in Section 2025.510(e), changing 'where if no transcript is produced' to 'if no transcript is produced' by removing the word 'where.'

Corrected a drafting error in Section 2025.510(h)(4), changing 'Nothing in the The case of Serrano v. Stefan Merli Plastering Co., Inc.' to 'The case of Serrano v. Stefan Merli Plastering Co., Inc.' by removing the redundant 'Nothing in the' phrase.

Civil discovery: oral depositions: transcriptions.

What changed between versions

How they voted

Actions timeline

Sponsors