applying Old § 1-201(37) developed percentage tests to determine whether the option price contained in a purported lease is nominal (“Percentage Tests”). Percentage Tests compare: (1) the option price contained in the agreement with the original purchase price of the “leased” goods; (2) the option price with the total stream of rental payments made under the contract; and (3) the original cost of the “leased” goods with the total payment stream. See, e.g., Orix Credit Alliance, Inc. v. Pappas, 946 F.2d 1258, 1261-62 (7th Cir.1991) (stating that an option price that represents 12% of total rental payments, while not dispositive, indicates a secured sale rather than true lease); Fruehauf Corp. v. Int’l Plastics, Inc. (In re Int’l Plastics, Inc.), 18 B.R. 583, 587 (Bankr.D.Kan.1982) (<HOLDING>); Equilease Corp. v. AAA Mach. Co. (In re AAA
holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease the lessee was required to exercise the option on or before the last day of the lease holding that the measure of damages for the breach of a contract of sale where no fraud is shown is the difference between the contract price and the market price of the goods on the date of the breach holding that option amount that is 53 of cash sale price on the date agreement was executed reflected a true lease holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease but providing no more specific time requirement the lessee had a reasonable time to exercise the option within the term of the lease holding that the question of whether a bankruptcy trustee or a putative lessor was entitled to the proceeds of an equipment sale depended on whether a true lease was involved when the lease is intended as a security interest article 9 applies however a bona fide lease is not affected by article 9