John Sheridan owned a Marathon gas station franchise. He sued Marathon Petroleum Co$.$ under Section $1$ of the Sherman Act and Section $3$ of the Clayton Act, charging it with illegally tying the processing of credit card sales to the gas station. As a condition of obtaining a Marathon dealership, dealers had to agree to let the franchisor process credit cards. They could not shop around to see if credit card processing could be obtained at a lower price from another source. The district court dismissed the case for failure to state a claim. Sheridan appealed.

Is there a tying arrangement?

If so$,$ does it violate the law? $($See The Clayton Act.$)$