Curtis Michael Richendollar, Cross-Appellant v. Diamond M Drilling Company, Inc., Cross-Appellee and Baker Shipyards, Inc.

POLITZ, Circuit Judge:

This case occasions our reconsideration en banc of certain of our precedents involving the determination of maritime jurisdiction, and the requisites for a maritime tort action under 33 U.S.C. § 905(b). We reiterate today that when it enacted § 905(b), Congress did not create a new or broader cause of action in admiralty than that which previously existed, but rather, it curtailed available third party tort actions, and in doing so it neither expanded nor constricted maritime jurisdiction. 1 We hold that in order for a waterborne structure to qualify as a “vessel” under…