Document:

Amendment to CEC Entertainment Inc Development Agreement for State of California

 Exhibit 10.38 
 AMENDMENT TO CEC ENTERTAINMENT, INC. 
 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 
 FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 
 The CEC Entertainment, Inc. Development Agreement between
                                        
(“Developer” or “You”) and CEC Entertainment, Inc. (“Franchisor”) dated
                             (the “Agreement”) shall be amended by the addition of the
following language, which shall be considered an integral part of the Agreement (the “Amendment”): 
 CALIFORNIA LAW MODIFICATIONS 

 1. The California Department of Corporations requires that certain provisions contained in franchise documents be amended to be consistent
with California law, including the California Franchise Investment Law, CAL. CORPORATIONS CODE Section 31000 et seq., and the California Franchise Relations Act, CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE Section 20000 et seq. To the extent that the
Agreement contains provisions that are inconsistent with the following, such provisions are hereby amended: 
  

	 	a.	California Business and Professions Code Sections 20000 through 20043 provide rights to You concerning termination of the Agreement. The Federal Bankruptcy Code also provides rights
to You concerning termination of the Agreement upon certain bankruptcy-related events. To the extent the Agreement contains a provision that is inconsistent with these laws, these laws shall control. 

  

	 	b.	If Developer is required in the Agreement to execute a release of claims, such release shall exclude claims arising under the California Franchise Investment Law and the California
Franchise Relations Act. 

  

	 	c.	If the Agreement requires payment of liquidated damages that is inconsistent with California Civil Code Section 1671, the liquidated damage clause may be unenforceable.

  

	 	d.	If the Agreement contains a covenant not to compete which extends beyond the expiration or termination of the Agreement, the covenant may be unenforceable under California law.

  

	 	e.	If the Agreement requires litigation, arbitration or mediation to be conducted in a forum other than the State of California, the requirement may be unenforceable under California
law. 

  

	 	f.	If the Agreement requires that it be governed by a state’s law, other than the State of California, such requirement may be unenforceable. 

  

 1 

 2. Each provision of this Amendment shall be effective only to the extent that the jurisdictional
requirements of the California law applicable to the provision are met independent of this Amendment. This Amendment shall have no force or effect if such jurisdictional requirements are not met. 
 3. As to any state law described in this Amendment that declares void or unenforceable any provision contained in the Development Agreement, Franchisor
reserves the right to challenge the enforceability of the state law by, among other things, bringing an appropriate legal action or by raising the claim in a legal action or arbitration that you have initiated. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fully executed, sealed and delivered this Amendment to the Agreement on
                            , 20    . 
  

													
	FRANCHISOR:	 		 		 	DEVELOPER:
		
	CEC Entertainment, Inc.	 	  

							
	By:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Name:	 	  

	Title:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Title:	 	  

					
	Witness:	 		 		 		 	Witness:
					
	  
	 		 		 		 	  

  

 2Amendment to CEC Entertainment Inc Development Agreement for State of Minnesota

 Exhibit 10.39 
 AMENDMENT TO CEC ENTERTAINMENT, INC. 
 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 
 FOR THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 
 The
CEC Entertainment, Inc. Development Agreement between
                                        
(“Developer” or “You”) and CEC Entertainment, Inc. (“Franchisor”) dated
                             (the “Agreement”) shall be amended by the addition of the
following language, which shall be considered an integral part of the Agreement (the “Amendment”): 
 MINNESOTA LAW MODIFICATIONS 

 1. The Commissioner of Commerce for the State of Minnesota requires that certain provisions contained in franchise documents be amended to
be consistent with Minnesota Franchise Act, Minn. Stat. Section 80.01 et seq., and of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Act (collectively the “Franchise Act”). To the extent that the Agreement and Offering Circular
contain provisions that are inconsistent with the following, such provisions are hereby amended: 
  

	 	a.	Franchise Act, Sec. 80C.14, Subd. 4., requires, except in certain specified cases, that Developer be given written notice of Franchisor’s intention not to renew 180 days prior
to expiration of the franchise and that Developer be given sufficient opportunity to operate the franchise in order to enable Developer the opportunity to recover the fair market value of the franchise as a going concern. If the Agreement contains a
provision that is inconsistent with the Franchise Act, the provisions of the Agreement shall be superseded by the Act’s requirements and shall have no force or effect. 

  

	 	b.	Franchise Act, Sec. 80C.14, Subd. 3., requires, except in certain specified cases, that Developer be given 90 days notice of termination (with 60 days to cure). If the Agreement
contains a provision that is inconsistent with the Franchise Act, the provisions of the Agreement shall be superseded by the Act’s requirements and shall have no force or effect. 

  

	 	c.	If the Agreement requires Developer to execute a release of claims or to acknowledge facts that would negate or remove from judicial review any statement, misrepresentation or
action that would violate the Franchise Act, such release shall exclude claims arising under the Franchise Act, and such acknowledgments shall be void with respect to claims under the Act. 

  

	 	d.	If the Agreement requires that it be governed by a state’s law, other than the State of Minnesota, those provisions shall not in any way abrogate or reduce any rights of
Developer as provided for in the Franchise Act, including the right to submit matters to the jurisdiction of the courts of Minnesota. 

  

 1 

	 	e.	If the Agreement requires Developer to sue Franchisor outside the State of Minnesota, those provisions shall not in any way abrogate or reduce any rights of Developer as provided
for in the Franchise Act, including the right to submit matters to the jurisdiction of the courts of Minnesota. 

  

	 	f.	Minn. Rule 2860.4400J. prohibits Franchisor from requiring You to consent to liquidated damages and prohibits waiver of a jury trial. If the Agreement contains a provision that is
inconsistent with the Minn. Rule, the provisions of the Agreement shall be superseded by the Minn. Rule’s requirements and shall have no force or effect. 

 2. Each provision of this Agreement shall be effective only to the extent that the jurisdictional requirements of the Minnesota law applicable to the
provision are met independent of this Amendment. This Amendment shall have no force or effect if such jurisdictional requirements are not met. 
 3. As to any state law described in this Amendment that declares void or unenforceable any provision contained in the Development Agreement, Franchisor reserves the right to challenge the enforceability of the state law by, among other
things, bringing an appropriate legal action or by raising the claim in a legal action or arbitration that you have initiated. 
 IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fully executed, sealed and delivered this Amendment to the Agreement on
                            , 20    . 
  

													
	FRANCHISOR:	 		 		 	DEVELOPER:
		
	CEC Entertainment, Inc.	 	  

							
	By:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Name:	 	  

	Title:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Title:	 	  

					
	Witness:	 		 		 		 	Witness:
					
	  
	 		 		 		 	  

  

 2Amendment to CEC Entertainment Inc Development Agreement for State North Dekota

 Exhibit 10.40 
 AMENDMENT TO CEC ENTERTAINMENT, INC. 
 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 
 FOR THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 
 The CEC Entertainment, Inc. Development Agreement between
                                        
(“Developer” or “You”) and CEC Entertainment, Inc. (“Franchisor”) dated
                             (the “Agreement”) shall be amended by the addition of the
following language, which shall be considered an integral part of the Agreement (the “Amendment”): 
 NORTH DAKOTA LAW MODIFICATIONS 

 1. The North Dakota Securities Commissioner requires that certain provisions contained in franchise documents be amended to be consistent
with North Dakota law, including the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law, North Dakota Century Code Annotated Chapter 51-19, Sections 51-19-01 through 51-19-17 (1993). To the extent that the Agreement contains provisions that are inconsistent with
the following, such provisions are hereby amended: 
  

	 	a.	If Developer is required in the Agreement to execute a release of claims or to acknowledge facts that would negate or remove from judicial review any statement, misrepresentation or
action that would violate the Law, or a rule or order under the Law, such release shall exclude claims arising under the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law, and such acknowledgments shall be void with respect to claims under the Law.

  

	 	b.	Covenants not to compete during the term of and upon termination or expiration of the Agreement are enforceable only under certain conditions according to North Dakota Law. If the
Agreement contains a covenant not to compete that is inconsistent with North Dakota Law, the covenant may be unenforceable. 

  

	 	c.	The Commissioner has held that requiring franchisees to consent to the jurisdiction of courts outside of North Dakota is unfair, unjust or inequitable within the intent of
Section 51-19-09 of the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law. 

  

	 	d.	If the Agreement requires that a state’s law, other than the State of North Dakota govern it, to the extent that such law conflicts with the North Dakota Law, North Dakota Law
shall control. 

  

	 	e.	If the Agreement requires mediation or arbitration to be conducted in a forum other than the State of North Dakota, the requirement may be unenforceable under the North Dakota
Franchise Investment Law. Arbitration involving a franchise purchased in the State of North Dakota must be held either in a location mutually agreed upon prior to the arbitration or if the parties cannot agree on a location, the location shall be
determined by the arbitrator. 

  

 1 

	 	f.	If the Agreement requires payment of a termination penalty, the requirement may be unenforceable under the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law. 

 2. Each provision of this Amendment shall be effective only to the extent that the jurisdictional requirements of the North Dakota Franchise Investment
Law, with respect to each such provision, are met independent of this Amendment. This Amendment shall have no force or effect if such jurisdictional requirements are not met. 
 3. As to any state law described in this Amendment that declares void or unenforceable any provision contained in the Development Agreement, Franchisor
reserves the right to challenge the enforceability of the state law by, among other things, bringing an appropriate legal action or by raising the claim in a legal action or arbitration that you have initiated. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have fully executed, sealed and delivered this Amendment to the Agreement on
                            , 20    . 
  

													
	FRANCHISOR:	 		 		 	DEVELOPER:
		
	CEC Entertainment, Inc.	 	  

							
	By:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	By:	 	  

	Name:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Name:	 	  

	Title:	 	  
	 		 		 		 	Title:	 	  

					
	Witness:	 		 		 		 	Witness:
					
	  
	 		 		 		 	  

  

 2

Source: [{"source": "alea-institute/alea-institute/kl3m-data-edgar-agreements/train-00137-of-00352.parquet"}, [{"source": "alea-institute/alea-institute/kl3m-data-edgar-agreements/train-00137-of-00352.parquet"}], [{"source": "alea-institute/alea-institute/kl3m-data-edgar-agreements/train-00137-of-00352.parquet"}]]