I have enough wariness about the law to wonder if there is such a thing as a "simple" legal issue.
You're right. And I often say that there's nothing simple about legal matters.
However, in court, contracts are first interpreted by reading the words on the page. When the words and their meanings are unambiguous [as with your paragraph (c)], a court will generally stop there and enforce the words.
I would not be shocked at all if someone here knew of a law, legal opinion, case law, common practice, etc. that would "nullify" or render unenforceable what the lease says.
That's always possible, but unlikely in this case.
I should stop here and post another excerpt from my lease, which I believe just reflects state law/code:
All notices given under this Lease must be in writing. Each party
must accept and claim the notices given by the other. Unless otherwise
required by law, they may be given by (a) personal delivery, or (b)
certified mail, returned receipt requested. Notice shall be addressed to
the Landlord at the address written at the beginning of this Lease and to
the Tenant at the Apartment.
"...accept and claim the notices" is an odd choice of words. It goes further than statutes. Statutes require evidence of delivery which could be just the tracking and delivery confirmation that I noted earlier. Your lease requires the recipient to acknowledge receipt which means that you'll need somebody's signature at the other end.
As would your landlord with regard to the notice that he allegedly sent you. If he cannot produce your signature on a delivery receipt then there was no notice as required by your lease.
See lease excerpt ("Notices") above. And it is a good-sized complex, so they have a staffed office who will sign for stuff.
Then certified mail with a signature request would suffice.
That is exactly why I am holding them to this.
As far as my argument that they failed to provide notice... see lease excerpt ("Notices") above.
Agree on both points.

